Full text of "ERIC ED304982: Annual Report on Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87."

See other formats

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 304 982

HE 022 285

TITLE Annual Report on Higher Education in New Jersey ,

1986-87.

INSTITUTION New Jersey State Dept. of Higher Education,

Trenton.
PUB DATE Nov 87

NOTE 56p.; For a related document, see HE 022 286.

PUB TYPE Statistical Data (110) — Reports - Descriptive (141)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC03 Plus Postage.

DESCRIPTORS * Access to Education; Allied Health Occupations;

Annual Reports; *College Environment; College
Faculty; Curriculum Development; Educational
Assessment; *Educational Finance; Enrollment
Influences; Equal Education; * Excellence in
Education; Faculty Development; Financial Support;
* Higher Education; Institutional Characteristics;
Minority Groups; Private Colleges; Public Colleges;
*State Action; State Surveys; Undergraduate Study

IDENTIFIERS Challenge Grants; *New Jersey

ABSTRACT

The New Jersey annual report on higher education
outlines achievements and problems within the system. Five sections
focus on the following topics: (1) introduction; (2) system status
report (size of the system, budget and finance, funding policies and
formulas, faculty, state college autonomy, and overall academic
health); (3) the foundations of excellence (the Governor's
challenges, departmental grant programs, the 1984 Jobs, Science, and
Technology Bond Act, and improving undergraduate education) ; (4)
equity/access (transfer advisory board, minority enrollment
initiatives, basic skills, affirmative action, and student
assistance) ; and (5) special issues (assessment. Student Unit Record
Enrollment system, health professions education policy, initiatives,
and sector study commissions) . Two appendices provide tables on
finance, academics, admissions/enrollments, and faculty in New Jersey
and on membership of the Advisory Board and groups. A map shows the
locations of New Jersey colleges and universities. Twelve figures
include information on total expenditures by New Jersey higher
education by collegiate sector, statewide distribution of projects,
and net tuition paid by tuition aid grant recipients. (SM)

* Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made

* from the original document.

CONTENTS

New Jersey board of Higher Education iii

I. Introduction 1

II. System Status Report 2

Introduction
Size of the System
Budget and Finance

Funding Trends

Capital Needs
Funding Policies and Formulas

Public Senior Institutions

Community Colleges

Independent Institutions
Faculty

Tenure Rates/Distributions by Rank

Early Retirement Incentive Program
State College Autonomy

Transition Schedule and Team

Approval Process
Overall Academic Health

Taculiy/Giirriciilwn Development

Grant Programs

Academic Index

III. The Foundations of excellence 9

Introduction

The Governor's Challenges
To Rutgers, the State University
w NJIT

To State Colleges

To UMDNJ

To Community Colleges
Departmental Grant Programs
Jobs, Science and Technology Bond Act

Overview

Status of Educational Portion-Funded Profits
Improving Undergraduate Education
Retention Initiative

IV. Equity/Access 15

Introduction
Transfer Advisory Board
Minority Enrollment Initiatives
Strategic Plans

Pre-College Academic Programs
EOF Freshman Policy

EOF Initiatives for Recruitment and Retention

SHEEO Task Force
Basic Skills

Testing and Placement

Pre-College Preparation
Affirmative Action

Biennial Report on College Faculty/Staff

Doctoral Program for Minorities
Student Assistance

State Programs

TAG Funding/Tuition Policy

Federal Programs

Student Aid Committee

Services to Veterans

V. Special Issues 22

Introduction
Assessment

Basic Skills Effectiveness

College Outcomes Evaluation Program (COEP)
Student Unit Record Enrollment
(SURE) System

Overviezu

System Implementation
Output

Health Professions Education Policy
Initiatives

Physician Licensure Standards

Graduate Medical Education
Sector Study Commissions

Report of the County College Panel

Report of the AICUNJ Panel

A\*\*ual Report on* Higher Education* i\' New Jersey, 1986-87 • i

FIGURES AND APPENDICES

Figures

Fig. 1. Total Expenditures by New Jersey Higher

Education, by Collegiate Sector 2
Fig. 2. Comparison of Growth in Salary and

Nonsalary Expenditures per FTE Student:

NJIX Rutgers University, State Colleges 3
Fig. 3. Comparison of Changes in the Higher

Education Price Index (HEPI), Consumer

Price Index (CPI), and State and County

Appropriations for New Jersey Public

Institutions of Higher Education 4
Fig. 4. Increasing Selectivity of New Jersey Public

Senior Colleges and Universities—

Comparison of SAT Scores of Test Takers

and Enrolled Freshmen 8
Fig. 5. Special Initiative Funding to New Jersey

Collegiate Sectors 10
Fig. 6. Statewide Distribution of Projects

Recommended for Funding under the Jobs,

Science and Technology Bond Act 13
Fig. 7. Black, Hispanic, and White/Other Full-time

Undergraduate Enrollment in New Jersey

Colleges and Universities 15
Fig. 8. College-Going Rates of White, Black, and

Hispanic New Jersey Public High School

Graduates 16
Fig. 9. Full-time Faculty at New Jersey Public

Colleges and Universities, by Ethnicity 18
Fig. 10. Average Tuition Charges and Average

Net Tuition Paid by Tuition Aid Grant

Recipients 20
Fig. 11. Pell Grants and State Grants to New Jersey

Po.-tsecondary Institutions 21
Fig. 12. Design of the SURE Information Collection

and Reporting System 24

Appendix A (Tables)

Financial

Table 1 Original Net State Appropriations for New

Jersey Higher Education 28
Table 2 Department of Higher Education Grant

Programs 29
Table 3 Tuition as a Percent of Educational Costs in

New Jersey Public Institutional Sectors, by

Student Type 30
Table 4 New Jersey State Student Grant

Programs 31
Table 5 Guaranteed Student Loan Programs 32

Academic

Table 6 Academic Index Data for Full-time First-time
Freshmen at New Jersey Public Senior
Institutions 32

Table 7 New Degree Programs Approved by the
New Jersey Board of Higher Education, by
Collegiate Sector and Degree Level 33

Table 8 Total Degrees Conferred in New Jersey Col-
leges and Universities, by Type of Degree 33

Table 9 Total Degrees Conferred in New Jersey
Colleges and Universities, by Collegiate
Sector 34

Table 10 Total Degrees Conferred in New Jersey
Colleges and Universities, by Sex and by
Ethnicity 34

Admissions/Enrollments

Table 11 Total Headcount Enrollment in New Jersey

Colleges and Universities 35
Table 12 Total Headcount Enrollment in New Jersey

Colleges and Universities, by Sex and by

Ethnicity 35

Table 13 Full-time First-time Freshman Enrollment by
Race/Ethnicity: by Collegiate Sector 36

Table 14 Full-time Undergraduate Enrollment by
Race/Ethnicity: by Collegiate Sector 36

Table 15 Special Admits as a Percent of Total Full-
time First-time Freshmen in New Jersey
Public Senior Colleges and Universities 37

Table 16 EOF Percent of New Jersey Full-time First-
time Freshmen in New Jersey Public Senior
Colleges and Universities 38

Table 17 EOF Percent of New Jersey Full-time First-
time Freshmen in New Jersey Community
Colleges 39

Table 18 EOF Percent of New Jersey Full-time First-
time Freshmen in New Jersey Independent
Colleges and Universities 40

Faculty

Table 19 Total and Tenured Faculty in New Jersey
Colleges and Universities, by Collegiate
Sector 41

Table 20 Distribution by Rank of Total Full-time
Faculty in New Jersey Colleges and
Universities, by Collegiate Sector 41

Table 21 Newly Hired Full-time Faculty in New

Jersey Public Colleges and Universities, by
Collegiate Sector 42

Table 22 Full-time Employees in New Jersey Public
Colleges and Universities, by Employment
Category, Sex, and Race/Ethnicity 43

Appendix B

Membership of Advisory Boards and Groups 46

ii • Annual Report on Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87

State of new Jersey
thomas h. kean, governor

Board of Higher Education

Dr. Deborah P. Wolfe, Chair

Mr. Albert W. Merck, Vice Chair

Dr. William O. Baker

Mr. Martin S. Barber

Mn Alfred W. Biondi

Mr. Michael Bongiovanni

Milton A. Buck, Esq.

Commissioner Saul Cooperman, ex officio

Mrs. Anne Dillman

Dr. Marion Epstein

Rabbi Martin Freedman

Thomas FL Gassert, Esq.

Milton FL Gelzer, Esq.

Dr. Paul Hardin

Mr. Donald A. Peterson

Mrs. Eleanor Todd

Chancellor T. Edward Hollander, ex officio

Annual Report on* Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87

TO: THE HONORABLE THOMAS H. KEAN,

GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF
l THE NEW JERSEY LEGISLATURE

In presenting this annual report, the Board and the Department of Higher
Education once again have the pleasure of recognizing the continued
commitment of the Governor and the Legislature to providing the
opportunity for higher education to all who wish to avail themselves of it.
We are proud of our institutions' recent accomplishments, but we are in no
way complacent about our unfinished agenda. The report is, we hope,
evenhanded both in outlining achievements, such as completing the first phase
of the transition to autonomy for the state colleges, and in addressing problems,
such as retention.

Our campus communities are maintaining and even accelerating their
momentum toward becoming the best of their kind in the country, and they
are workiiig long and hard, with all of the resources at their disposal, to make
excellence the norm in New Jersey.

Your continued support reflects, in part, the importance that the citizens of
New Jersey place upon higher education. We hope that you will find, in reading
trus report, that your constituents' trust and expectations are being fulfilled.

T. Edward Hollander, Chancellor
Department of Higher Education

Dr. Deborah P. Wolfe, Chair
Board of Higher Education

November 1987

Annum Ri:i'ori on Higher Education in New Jersey* 1986-87 • 1

SYSTEM SWUS
REPORT

INTRODUCTION

This chapter highlights trends and initiatives
in the major areas of statutory responsibility
of the New Jersey Board and Department of
Higher Education: planning, finance, governance,
and system oversight. Discharging these funda-
mental duties undergirds all other efforts, in the
areas of excellence, access, and special issues.
(See Appendix A for various compilations de-
scribing the current state of the system.)

Size of system

ew Jersey's $2.1 billion system of 57
colleges and universities enrolled 297,000
students in fall 1986 - about the same as

the year before, interrupting the decline that
began in fall 1983. (To the extent that recent high
school graduates remain the predominant college
cohort, however, a decline will continue into the
1990s, when an upturn reflecting increased
birthrates of the early 1980s will occur.) State and
independent college enrollments declined while
the public universities and the community

colleges registered modest increases, the latter for
the first time since 1983. The number of graduates
also has been declining, but not as fast as enroll-
ments, and the system still confers approximately
43,000 degrees each year. The number of full-time
faculty remains just under 10,000, providing a
higher instructional ratio and a richer educational
experience for students. (See Appendix A for data
on enrollments, degrees, and faculty.)

BUDGET AND FINANCE

Funding Trends

Between FY 1978 and FY 1987, the original
net state appropriation for higher education
more than doubled, from $379 million to
$792 million. Because this increase exceeds that of
the Higher Education Price Index (HEPI) over the
same period, the system experienced a "real"
increase of about 11%. By contrast, from FY 1980
through 1985, "real" decreases obtained when the
constant dollar state appropriations fell as much
as 7% below the FY 1978 level. (An $883 million
net state appropriation in FY 1988 will continue
this trend toward significantly Improved levels of
state support.)

Figure 1. Total Expenditures by New Jersey Higher Education

2 • Annual Report on' Higher Education* in New Jerscy, 1986-87

Approximately 90% of the FY 1987 appropria-
tion supported institutional operations, student
assistance programs, and health professions
education. Slightly more than half of the remain-
ing 10% funded debt service; the rest financed
capital projects, operations of the Board and the
Department, and special programs. (See Table 1
in Appendix A.)

The amount for institutional operations ($715
million) included $36.3 million for the Governor's
challenges (see pages 9 to 12), the major initiative
in the FY 1987 budget. The $1.9 million Urban
Initiative, one of the most important special pro-
grams, also continued in 1986-87, funding pre-
collegiate centers (page 16) throughout the state.
With a $10.5 million appropriation, the Depart-
ment of Higher Education (DHE) Grant Programs
(pages 7, 8, and 12) were the largest special pro-
gram in the budget.

The portions of the budget devoted to institu-
tional operations aim to limit salary growth while
increasing nonsalary expenditures in order to
preserve the educational quality and long-term
vitality of the institutions. Funding for student
assistance programs also reflects the commitment
of the Governor and the Legislature to investing
in higher education - by providing students from
diverse backgrounds with the financial means to
benefit from such an investment. Especially im-
portant was the State's commitment to the Tuition
Aid Grant (TAG) and Educational Opportunity
Fund (EOF) programs, which totalled $45.1 mil-
lion and $18.1 million, respectively, in FY 1987.

Capital Needs

The public senior institutions requested a
total of $531.3 million dollars for capital
projects in FY 1987, including $21.7 million
for capital renewal, $25.2 million for fire safety,
and $3.8 million for asbestos abatement. The
Department requested $70.8 million and received
$12.0 million for capital renewal and replacement.
In addition, the Department competed aggres-
sively and successfully for its share of $10.0 mil-
lion available to state agencies for fire safety and
asbestos abatement.

In developing their FY 1987 capital requests, the
public senior institutions projected a total seven-
year capital need (1987 to 1993) of $1.1 billion. The
projected needs cover a variety of projects, pri-
marily new and improved educational programs
to meet the Governor's challenges, but also cor-
rections of deficiencies to preserve the facilities.

Figure 2. Comparison of Growth in Salary and Nonsalary
Expenditures Per FTE Student: N.J.I.T., Rutgers,
State Colleges

200

190

180

170

160

< $2,009
peiFTE^

150

140

**/

130

120

(BimVw « 12.193)

110

Non SftUry I /FTE
(B*S0 Year - $789)

100

<$4J93

per fier

($1,136
per FTE)

-k
*i

-t-

<*2.490
per FTEL

-10

-20

1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986
(Base)

Fiscal Years

• Current

* Constant

ERLC

Annual REPOKr ok Higher Education' in New jursly. 1986-87 * 3

Included are $934 million for new construction
and equipment, $113 million for renewal and
replacement, $48 million for current fire and
safety code requirements, and $24 million for
asbestos abatement. The backlog of capital re-
newal and replacement projects, which threatens
the State's $2 billion capital investment in higher
education, stems from inadequate funding over a
period. of years - just $40.5 million has been
appropriated in the past 10 years, all for renewal
and replacement.

For county colleges, 1985 legislation doubled
(to $160 million) the total amount of capital proj-
ects for which the State would finance 50% of
the debt service on county-issued bonds. At that
time, the sector had defined a capital need of
$172.5 million. By the end of FY 1987, $73.9 mil-
lion of the additional $80 million had been acti-
vated under this state capital funding program.
(Remaining funds will help support capital re-
newal and replacement projects in FY 1988.)

A $100 million capital need in the county col-
lege sector remains unfunded; the systemwide
capital need in New Jersey higher education
(including the independent institutions) stands at
more than $1.3 billion. To address this need, the
Department, in consultation with the higher ed-
ucation community, began developing in 1986-87
a statewide program (to begin in 1988) to provide
a continuous flow of capital funds in the future.

FUNDING POLICIES

AND FORMULAS

An incentive/base budget funding process
has evolved in New Jersey over several
years. In the past, enrollment "quantity,"
primarily, determined operating budgets and
support for institutions of higher education in
New Jersey. The State's financial policies, however,
gradually have shifted from financing enrollments
to financing excellence and access. Although
portions of the higher education budget con-
tinue to be allocated by formula (as mandated
by statute), these formulas have become more so-
phisticated, linking support to factors other than
strictly capitation. Program costs, for example,
are a major factor in community college funding;
service to state residents and to needy students,
in the funding of independent institutions. In

4 • Annual Report on Higher Education' in 1 New Jersey 1986-87

addition, the DHE grants (see pages 7 to 8),
along with the Governor's challenges (pages 9
through 12) provide substantial support above
direct operating aid, reward quality in the
distribution of funds, and promote both excel-
lence and fiscal viability.

Public Senior Institutions

■ n FY 1984, incentive-based budgeting replaced
I enrollment-driven formula funding for public
I senior colleges and universities, redirecting
resources to nonsalary areas to preserve educa-

Figure 3. Comparison of Changes in the Higher Education
Price Index (HEPI), the Consumer Price Index (CPU,
and State* and County Appropriations for N.J. Public
Institutions of Higher Education

Fiscal Years

78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87
Appropriations CPI — HEPI

•Original Net State Appropriations

tional quality and the system's long-term vitality.
Beginning in FY 1986, operating budgets were
determined, for the first time, by providing each
institution with a "base" budget equivalent to the
previous year's support (less items funded once)
and additional funding for program priorities.
The "above-base" increases were targeted for
specific initiatives, such as furthering the insti-
tutions' plans for excellence or expanding service
for underrepresented populations.

This methodology has protected the institutions
from the decreased appropriations that declining
enrollments would have brought under the old
formulas, and actually has generated
substantially increased state support per student.
At the same time, since increases in above-base
funding have been restricted almost exclusively to
special projects, the institutions have had to
reallocate within their base budgets to respond to
dramatically changing demographic and
curricular trends.

The Board cf Higher Education's policies in-
fluence these difficult reallocation decisions.
For instance, the Board has capped salary ex-
penditures (at 73% of base budgets) to ensure
support for nonsalary areas, such as libraries,
equipment, and maintenance. A further impetus
toward maintaining facilities is the Board's 10%
limitation on the amount institutions can re-
allocate from their physical plant budgets for
other activities.

Community Colleges

Legislation enacted in 1981 shifted overall
state funding for the community college
sector from a capitation model (fixed dollar
amounts per student) to one based primarily on
the colleges' educational and general operating
costs. This new funding mechanism has con-
tributed significantly to the county colleges' fiscal
health. In FY 1987 it brought them the second
largest increase in the public sector over FY 1983,
the last year of funding by the old model. Opera-
ting support rose 41% during the period, slightly
less than the 45% increase enjoyed by the state
colleges (Governor's challenge funding excluded).

Also as a result of the legislation, state appro-
priations now are allocated to the colleges under
a formula that includes two types of support,
differential and categorical. Differential funding
recognizes differences in program costs, parti-
cularly in the areas of technological and health
education and basic skills remediation, and pro-

vides varying support per credit hour of enrollment
for these types of courses. Categorical funding
promotes continuing program development and
provides basic institutional support, irrespective
of costs, allocated by an enrollment-driven formula.

The Governor's challenge to the community
colleges (see pages 11 -12) continued in FY 1987 a
type of special categorical funding introduced the
previous year. A second new type of categorical
aid (also in its second year) went to the Southern
CIM Center (page 14). This funding mechanism
provides resources for special regional programs
of statewide significance for the high costs of
operating and equipping the facilities.

Independent Institutions

The Independent College and University
Assistance Act (ICUAA) of July 1979 revised
funding policy for the state's 16 indepen-
dent institutions with a public mission. The act
bases state support for the sector on both enroll-
ment in the independent colleges and per-
stuJent state aid to the state colleges. Funds are
allocated to each college based primarily upon its
enrollment of New Jersey residents and of state
financial aid recipients.

The ICUAA recognizes the contribution of New
Jersey's independent colleges and universities
and reflects the Board's commitment to a diverse
system of higher education. Fiscal constraints,
however, thwarted the Board and Department's
intentions for full funding of the Aid Act, and the
proportions funded declined from 84% in FY 1981
to 72% in FY 1984. This downward trend was
reversed in FY 1985 and support has increased
steadily since. An $18.1 million appropriation in
FY 1987 represented 94% of full funding.

The independent institutions receive substantial
amounts of other state aid, in addition to ICUAA
funding. Total direct aid in FY 1987 was $28.1
million, comprised of aid to schools of profes-
sional nursing; funding through grant programs,
scholarly chairs, and EOF program support serv-
ices, as well as ICUAA; and support for the
Fairleigh Dickinson University School of Dentistry.
In addition to this direct aid, the colleges
received $22.7 million in indirect aid from the
state, in the form of financial assistance under
EOF, TAG, GSS, and other state student aid
programs. The total of nearly $51 million
accounted for 13% of the educational and general
(E&G) expenditures in the sector. Percentages for
individual institutions ranged from 1.3% to 39%.

Annual Report on 1 Higi ier Education' in New Jersey* 1986-87 • 5

FACULTY

Tenure Rates/Distributions by Rank

As New Jersey's system of higher education
grew, the number of faculty serving the
expanded system also grew. However,
tenure awards and promotions to the upper
ranks stabilized the overall size of the faculty
despite the enrollment declines of recent years,
producing a heavily tenured, "top-heavy" faculty.
Foi example, in the last 10 years, the statewide
percentage of faculty holding tenure has risen
from 64% to 68%. (See Table 19 in Appendix A.)
In the state and community college sectors, the
rates are about 80%. Ten years ago, senior faculty
were just one-half of the total; now they are 62%.

Enrollment declines thus have ended the inter-
institutional mobility previously enjoyed by faculty.
This, combined with high rates of tenured
faculty, has seriously limited institutional
flexibility.

Early Retirement Incentive Program

Limited hiring of new faculty impedes the
institutions' capacity to respond to shifts in
student programmatic interest and labor
market demands. Fiscal constraints on creating
new faculty lines and a relatively high mandatory
retirement age also restrict institutional flexibility
in this regard. Specifically, institutions find it
difficult to build new or enhance existing pro-
grams, and to enrich their programs with the
vitality of new, young Ph.D.'s. Moreover, realizing
affirmative action goals is impeded, since poten-
tial women and minority faculty are found largely
among this group. In addition, a heavily tenured,
older faculty carries higher salary costs for the
institutions.

Spring 1987 legislation established an early
retirement incentive program for tenured faculty.
This statute, unique in the nation, empowers
individual boards of trustees (both public and
independent) to fashion programs to meet their
institutions' particular needs. (Public colleges,
except community colleges with pre-existing pro-
grams, must develop theirs in accordance with
statutory provisions regarding retirement ages
and salary incentives.) The law also allows in-
stitutions to exclude from eligibility faculty in
certain degree programs, if sound educational
policy warrants. It appropriates $3 million (up to

$10,000 per faculty member per year) to support
replacements in 1987-88 for faculty retiring under
the program.

The legislation requires institutions wishing
to participate in the program to obtain Board
of Higher Education approval of their program
plans. All 11 public senior institutions, 14 county
colleges, and four independent institutions sub-
mitted and had plans approved.

These 29 institutions accepted 480 applications
for retirement under their respective programs
(222 for June 30, 1987 retirement, and 258 for June
30, 1988). In some instances, the institutions will
enjoy a major reduction in tenure levels as a
result of the retirements. New hiring will occur
primarily in high enrollment programs or new
areas of study; many positions will be held in
reserve. The public senior institutions are the
major participants in the program, accounting for
about 80% of scheduled retirements. Their plans
feature increased promotional opportunities
and recruitment of new senior faculty. (Plans
for the 1988 retirements are not final, since these
faculty may withdraw their applications before
the effective date.)

The institutions will report annually for the
next three years on their use of the lines made
available by this program, for the Board of Higher
Education to assess the program's contribution to
improving institutional and programmatic flexibility.

State Colleg e autonomy

Transition Schedule and Team

On July 9, 1986, Governor Kean signed leg-
islation (P.L. 1986, c.42) granting the state
colleges operational autonomy similar to
that enjoyed by New Jersey's other public senior
institutions. The legislation requires the Board of
Higher Education to oversee a process that would
ensure the state colleges' successful transition to
full autonomy (by July 1, 1989). The Governor
also signed the state college contracts law (P.L.
1986, c.43), transferring administrative authority
for purchasing functions j "eviously performed by
the state purchasing bureau

The Board of Higher Education in July 1986
adopted a working schedule for the transition,
and authorized the Chancellor to appoint a team
to oversee it and to facilitate its implementation.
(The team is comprised of Department staff and

6 • Annual Rix>rton Higher Education in New Jcrshy, 1986-87

state college personnel. See Appendix B.) The
working schedule called for a three-phase tran-
sition to delegate to the colleges authority for
different sets of functions/operations. The
transition team, in consultation with state college
vice presidents for administration and finance,
developed an approval process for the Board of
Higher Education to transfer the functions. Jn
addition, the team and institutional staff have
been working extensively with other state agen-
cies to help ensure orderly transition to campus-
level responsibility for agency activities.

Approval Process

The formal transition approval process re-
quired each state college to develop policies
and procedures for designated functions,
tailored to its particular needs. (Appropriate certi-
fied consultants were to assist if required.) In
addition, consultants had to certify, to the presi-
dents and boards of trustees of the college, that
the procedures would implement the policies, and
that both met tests for internal control and audit
trail and were consistent with various standards
and with New jersey statutes and regulations.
The transition team reviews the college's process
and certifies it to the Chancellor and to the Board
of Higher Education, which authorizes transfer of
the function.

Phase I (purchasing, travel, and internal auditing
functions) was completed in April 1987. Most of
Phase II (accounting, cash and revenue manage-
ment, and disbursing functions, as well as policies
for institutional borrowing) also was accomplished
during FY 1987. (Work continues on the rest of
Phase II, and on the third and final phase, trans-
ferring the payroll system and insurance functions.)

OVERALL ACADEMIC HEALTH

Stiong, continually enhanced and revitalized
curricula taught by highly qualified faculty
to an able and motivated student body mark
an academically healthy system of higher educa-
tion. Policies and programs of the Board and
Department of Higher Education foster such a
system. At the same time, the guality improve-
ments that the colleges have effected in recent
years set the stage for less state monitoring and
greater cooperative planning to stimulate further
systemwide advances.

Faculty/Currif ulum Development

The Department cooperated extensively with
the institutions during 1986-87 on faculty
and curriculum development. A series of
conferences and workshops covered a wide range
of topics: graduate teacher preparation, writing
assessment, use of technology (for example,
interac* ndeodiscs) and' ^ applications in
educatib. . and grantsmar tip.

The Department also funded several major proj-
ects. The Bilingual Court Interpreter Education
project at Montclair State College, for example,
will develop a model curriculum and materials for
translation and interpretation programs that will
be staffed by educators trained at an intensive
summer institute. The "gender peispectives '
project (see page 12) will help educators develop
new undergraduate curricula through a conference
and a summer institute. At the Department's
annual curriculum enhancement conferences (this
year in music, biology, history, and psychology),
state college faculty explored cutting-edge issues
in their disciplines to help them introduce cur-
ricular changes on their home campuses.

The education component of the Department-
funded Intercampus Telecommunications Network
project (see page 12) seeks to educate faculty and
staff through a variety of activities and projects,
including an electronic newsletter, seminar a
conference, and a half-hour television show on
New Jersey Network.

In addition to these activities, the Department
is actively exploring possible initiatives to improve
collegiate teaching and learning, a direct out-
growth of comments and suggestions generated
by last year's (1985-86) faculty dialogues. Also
anticipated is a better-coordinated program of
conferences and workshops, as well as a plan for
long-term expansion of faculty development and
curriculum enhancement activities.

Grant Programs

The Department's grant programs, designed
to foster academic excellence in all discip-
lines, were instituted in 1983-84 with three
competitive grant programs. An expanded roster
of programs (eight in 1986-87) includes three in
science and technology, and three in the humani-
ties. The seventh, originally a special project of
the Department, serves learning disabled stu-
dents. The eighth, the Fund for the Improvement
of Collegiate Education (FICE), funded its last

Annual Rfi*ort on ! Iicur.k Education in New JrRSKY. 1986-87 * 7

round of new grants in 1986-87. (FY 1987 marked
the third and final year that $2.0 million in funds
were available from the New Jersey Higher Edu-
cation Assistance Authority for the FICE program.
In FY 1988, a new grant program to improve
student retention rates, especially among mi-
norities, will begin. See page 14.) All the grant
programs stress undergraduate education.

The programs distributed $12 million in 1986-87
to institutions in all sectors of New Jersey higher
education, bringing to nearly $40 million the total
since their inception. FY 1987 funds supported
263 projects, slightly less than half (47%) at public
senior institutions, one-fifth (20%) at community
colleges, and one-third (33%) at independent col-
leges. (See Table 2 in Appendix A.)

To ensure objectivity in awarding the grants,
panels of out-of-state consultants - expert and
experienced in higher education institutions
similar to New Jersey's - review the proposals.
The 1986-87 winners were culled from 748 pre-
liminary proposals totalling $54 million. During
the past three years of the grant programs' oper-
ation, 9,249 proposals totalling more than $146
million have been submitted; 721 have been
funded. Funded proposals in FY 1987 included

such diverse projects as "Development of a Course
on the Anthropology of War," "Science and Math-
ematics Enrichment for the Disabled," "Computer-
Assisted Writing Laboratory^" "Public Project for
the Bicentennial of the Constitution," "Enhancing
Spanish Instruction Through Video Presentation,"
and "Women and the Fine Arts: Historical and
Cultural Overview'."

Academic Index

The Board of Higher Education supports
colleges' efforts to recruit and retain an
increasingly well-qualified student body.
The academic index (AI), for example, recom-
mended in the Board's statewide plan, measures
prior academic performance of students at the
public senior colleges and universities. Each in-
stitution's index combines average scholastic
aptitude test (SAT) scores and high school class
ranks of its regularly admitted freshmen. Data for
the sixth year of implementation (fall 1986) show
that, consistent with the policy, AIs exceed insti-
tutional baselines, which are averages of 1978-1980.
Moreover, at most institutions, it has risen stead-
ily since the policy was instituted five years ago
(see Table 6 in Appendix A).

Figure 4. N.J. Public Senior Colleges and Universities: Comparison of SAT Scores for Test Takers and Enrolled Freshmen*
1000

1980 1981 1982
N.J. Freshmen — ■ All Test Takers: U.S. -

'Regularly admitted/ full-time first-time freshmen, fall of each year.

8 • Ascnual Report on' Higher Education in 1 New Jersey. 1986-87

1983 1984
All Test Takers: Region

1985 1986
m All Test Takers: N.J.

THE FOUNDATIONS OF
EXCELLENCE

INTRODUCTION

Excellence in New Jersey's system of higher
education is a fundamental commitment of
the Board and Department of Higher Educa-
tion, whose regular efforts maintain and improve
quality throughout the system. In addition, com-
petitive funding mechanisms both stimulate and
reward excellence at the institutions. The extra-
ordinary stimulus of the Governor's challenge,
moreover, is launching New Jersey's colleges and
universities into the ranks of the best institutions
of their kind in the nation.

THE GOVERNOR'S
CHALLENGES

Rutgers, The State University

A $14.0 million appropriation in FY 1987
supported the challenge to Rutgers. The
university broadened its base of "world
class" scholars during the year by appointing
senior faculty in plant molecular biology, ceramics,
chemical biology, computer science, mathematics,
mechanics and materials science, music, and neuro-
science. (This adds to senior faculty appointments
last year in five other fields.) In addition, the
Henry Rutgers Research Fellowship has helped the
university recruit 60 promising junior faculty who,
in less than two years, have written 232 publica-
tions, including 14 books. Further, the university
attracted 700 externally funded research awards
(up 16% over the previous year), marking a record
high in all categories of support. Moreover, Rutgers
garnered $2.8 million in corporate contributions
from 88 corporate members participating in its
high technology research centers and institutes.

The university's enhanced reputation is attract-
ing more applications for admission and more
highly qualified applicants, both undergraduate
and graduate. The mean SAT score for regularly
admitted freshmen has increased 61 points since
1981; mean GRE scores of applicants to graduate
programs also have risen. At the same time, the
university reversed its minority enrollment decline
through vigorous post-admissions recruitment
and academic support programs. Between fall 1985
and fall 1986, blacks and Hispanics increased as
a proportion of all full-time first-time freshmen,

as well as among those enrolled through the
Educational Opportunity Fund. Moreover, first-
year retention rates (between fall 1984 and 1985)
increased for both black and Hispanic freshmen.

Finally, a $338 million Fund for Distinction, the
largest capital construction program in Rutgers'
history/will finance nine new science institutes
and over 45 academic and student life facilities.
The university this past year began construction
of a chemical biology addition to the College of
Pharmacy, and broke ground for two advanced
technology centers (which are supported also by
the Jobs, Science and Technology Bond Act; see
page 13).

New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT)

With nearly $6 million in FY 1987 challenge
funding, NJIT progressed significantly in
the second year of its response to the
Governor's challenge. Recruitment of senior faculty
accelerated with the appointment of a Dean of the
Newark College of Engineering, chairpersons in
computer and information science and in mathe-
mat ; cs, a director of the Computer Integrated
Manufacturing (CIM) Center and Manufacturing
Extension Center, and a director of the Center
for Hazardous and Toxic Substance Management
(designated a national research center by the
National Science Foundation). NJIT also success-
fully recruited active research scientists to occupy
state-sponsored faculty chairs in microelectronics,
biotechnology, manufacturing/productivity, and
computer science. In addition, the institute filled
faculty chairs in optoelectronics and solid state
circuits and in manufacturing engineering, the
first to be funded by the Foundation at the New
Jersey Institute of Technology. (The foundation
promotes research and raises funds in support
of the Governor's challenge to the institute.) In
addition to the chair holders, 12 junior faculty
members in areas important to NJIT's mission
were appointed.

Graduate enrollment continued to increase -
reaching 23% of total enrollment in fall 1986, ju*t
below the 1990 target of 25%. NJIT's plan for a
computer-intensive campus environment pro-
gressed with the addition of a new 50-station
networked computer laboratory (bringing the total
to three), and the completion of the backbone of
the campuswide fiber-optics-based computer
network, as well as microcomputers for every
incoming freshman (as in 1985). Finally, NJIT
improved substantially the academic profile of

£ I

ERLC

Annual Reporxon Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87 • 9

its regularly admitted students while maintaining
its strong record of access for minority students
and services to Newark's public school students.

State Colleges

The final rounds of Governor's Challenge
competition occurred during 1986-87. In
July 1986, drawing on the expertise of the
same consultant team praised last year by the
Distinguished Review Panel (see Appendix B),
Chancellor Hollander recommended and the Board
of Higher Education approved challenge grants
to Ramapo College of New Jersey, and Montclair,
Thomas A. Edison, and Trenton State Colleges.

Ramapo College was awarded $3.4 million to
enhance the "global and multicultural literacy"
of its student body through a new orientation of
the college's environment, both curricular and
extracurricular. In addition to developmental
activities involving two-thirds of the faculty, the

Figure 5.

(000)
16,000

grant will support a state-of-the-art telecommuni-
cations center for sophisticated international tele-
conferencing as well as worldwide television
reception in the dormitories.

Montclair's $5.7 million grant, to continue de-
veloping its center for distinction in the fine
and performing arts, will bring to the college's
instructional program renowned performing arts
organizations, such as the New York Philharmonic
Orchestra and the Alvin Ailey Dance Company.
The grant also will establish a new Opera and
Music Theatre Institute.

With a grant of $1.8 million, Edison will expand
services to its clientele, the self-directed adult
learner, through a new Computer Assisted Life-
long Learning (CALL) Network. Students any-
where in the world will be able to complete an
Edison degree by using computers (in their homes,
places of employment, or local libraries) for both
coursework and advisement.

Special Initiative Funding to (Mew Jersey Collegiate Sectors ($000)

14,000

12,000

10,000
8,000

I -3

\] ri

6,000

4,000

:. h

n i

2,000

1 - , ■

1 1.1 iJ .

Rutgers N.J.l.T. U.M.D.N.J.

•Inclcdes funds awarded through D.H.E. Grant Programs and the Commission on Science
and Technology.

••Includes D.H.E. Grants, the Governor's Challenge* and Urban Initiative funding. (Beginning
in F.Y. 1986. funding for programs of the Commission on Science and Technology are not
included in the higher education budget.)

State

1984*

Community

1985*

Independent

M986"

1987 #

10 • Annual Report on' Higher Education in Nc.v Jcrscy. 1986-87

Trenton State drew $2.9 million to continue its
development as a highly selective college serving
New Jersey's most talented high school graduates.
The grant is geared not only to attracting more
such students,ibut also to strengthening the
curriculum to challenge them sufficiently.

In the final round of competition, the Board
approved grants (in December 1986, pending
passage of the FY 1988 budget) to Glassboro State
College, William Paterson College of New Jersey,
and Montclair State College. Glassboro's challenge
is to liberalize its professional curricula; Paterson's,
to produce a technologically trained workforce for
the region; and MontcIairV *o integrate critical
thinking throughout the cu riculum. After three
rounds, only one state college did not qualify for
a challenge grant; only one (Montclair) drew two.

The first two challenge grants - to Jersey City
State College, to convert to a cooperative education-
based curriculum, and to Kean College, to devel-
op a comprehensive value-added assessment
program and to infuse computers across its cur-
riculum — completed their second year in 1986-87.
Reports to the Chancellor showed both colleges
continuing to advance their three-year excellence
plans. Both engaged in major faculty and curri-
culum development efforts and acquired new
instructional equipment. They also held confer-
ences, featuring nationally recognized speakers,
as forums for their projects. Jersey City's focused
on its comprehensive campus- and curriculum-
wide approach, convening practitioners from
across the country. In addition, the college was
able to offer full cooperative education scholar-
ships to 25 "Corporate Scholars." Further, arti-
culation agreements were negotiated with five
community colleges to permit early transfer of
associate degree holders.

The Kean College conference informed faculty
and administrators about the college's evolving
model for outcomes assessment and about
similar programs in other states. For the
computer integrated curriculum aspect of its
challenge, Kean's faculty and professional staff
were trained during the year to develop their
knowledge and competence in using computers
for instructional and administrative purposes.

During 1986-87, the Distinguished Review Panel
for the first year of the challenge, led by former
U.S. Education Secretary Terrel Bell, assessed
how well the process was accomplishing the
goals of the challenge. They concluded that the
Governor's program was off to a superb start,

with the hard work of implementation ahead for
the colleges, saying:

New Jersey's state colleges are positioned to
become leaders among AASCU (American Asso-
ciation of State Colleges and Universities) institu-
tions. Their challenge programs are exciting and
hold the promise for creating the conditions for
institutional excellence. The high school graduates
in the Garden State have more reason than ever
before to stay in the state for their higher educa-
tion. With excellent programs to offer, the colleges
should be able to attract students from across the
state and nation.

University of Medicine and Dentistry
of New Jersey (UMDNJ)

■ n his 1986 State-of-the-State Address, Governor
I Kean challenged UMDNJ to join the ranks of
I the nation's top 25 health sciences universities
by the year 2000; he then recommended $4.8
million in new FY 1987 funding for the university
to begin achieving this objective. The legislature
approved these funds, with which UMDNJ has
recruited nationally prominent scientists to chair
several basic science and clinical departments at
New Jersey Medical School and Robert Wood
Johnson Medical School (the new name of the
Rutgers Medical School effective July 1, 1986).
In addition, the funds have supported further
development of clinical centers of excellence in
the study and treatment of liver and heart disease
and cancer. Further, the university began working
with the Department of Higher Education during
1986-87 to develop measures to assess its pro-
gress in achieving the Governor's challenge.

Community Colleges

A $3.5 million appropriation in 1986-87 sup-
ported the first year of Governor Kean's
challenge to the community colleges "to
develop and implement innovative programs
fostering educational excellence." Thirteen colleges
competed for grants with proposals addressing
minority student recruitment and retention (in-
cluding basic skills remediation), technology
education (including linkages with business
and industry), and cooperation with secondary
schools. Six requested planning grants to enable
them to compete in the next round.

As with the state college challenge, a team of
experts reviewed the proposals and recommend-
ed awards for the best, won in 1986-87 by Brook-
dale Community College, Mercer County Com-

An'n'ual Report on* Higher Education* in 1 New Jersey, 1986-87 • 11

ERIC 1 G

o Si

munity College, and Union County College.
Brookdale garnered a $1.1 million grant for an
early intervention program (beginning in middle-
school grades) to enhance minority students'
motivation and achievement, and for a program
with local high schools to prepare students for
postsecondary education and careers in advanced
technologies. Mercer's proposal, which drew a
$1.2 million award, features career assessment,
remedial education, and employment and re-entry
training. Access to these services will enable
minorities, nontraditional students, and adults to
take advantage of the opportunities and benefits
of higher education. A $1.2 million grant to Union
will support alliances with urban high schools,
businesses, and industries in its community.
These linkages will provide access to educational
experiences at the college for moderate-achieving
minority students and high-risk high school
students, and education and training for under-
employed and unemployed minority residents.

In May 1987, the Department received 13 appli-
cations for FY 1988 challenge grant funding. (The
review panel brought its recommendations for
funding to the Chancellor in July 1987.) The FY
1988 Request for Proposals benefited from the
comments and suggestions of county college
presidents, the FY 1987 review panel, and an
oversight committee (see Appendix B) which in
February 1987 had delivered an assessment of the
county college challenge grant program. The
committee encouraged greater interinstitutional
collaboration, endorsed the priorities of the
program, and found it a good mechanism for
stimulating the colleges' involvement in the state's
economic development.

DEPARTMENTAL GRANT
PROGRAMS

The DHE Grant Programs (see page 7) have
sponsored a variety of special activities,
supplementing the systemwide excellence
initiative by addressing more narrowly defined
issues. One is the "Business/Humanities Project,"
which will strengthen the relationship between
career development and collegiate programs, and
increase communication and cooperation between
the business and education communities in New
Jersey. Another special grant supported the

12 • Annual Report on' Higher Education' in' New Jersey, 1986-87

"Statewide Plan to Integrate Gender Perspectives
into the Higher Education Curriculum," which
seeks to increase awareness of gender and other
perspectives often overlooked in college curricula,
such as ethnicity, and to establish curriculum
resource centers at several sites around the state.

A special project launched with a DHE grants-
supported feasibility study in 1985-86, the
Intercampus Telecommunications Network (ITN)
project, progressed in its planning in 1986-87.
ITN, envisioned as a fully integrated voice, data,
and video communications network linking all
New Jersey colleges and universities, will provide
unprecedented access to the opportunities afford-
ed by telecommunications technology. During the
year, a steering committee worked with 150 vol-
unteers, representing every sector of New Jersey
higher education as well as government and not-
for-profit telecommunications entities, to further
develop and implement the project.

The project advanced significantly through the
efforts of three task forces, an assessment team,
an ad hoc management group, and a presidential
advisory committee drawn from the volunteers.
For example, the task force on educational activi-
ties developed a variety of mechanisms to inform
faculty and administrators about networking
applications. In addition, a technical task force
collected data on the extant base of computing
and telecommunications resources at the institu-
tions for use in developing the technical design
of the network.

JOBS, SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY BOND ACT

Overview

The 1984 Jobs, Science and Technology Bond
Act approved $90 million for capital projects
to strengthen New Jersey higher education
in two areas of high technology development-
research and education/training. To advance this
dual purpose, the act specifies $57 million for
a network of cooperative academic-industrial
research centers in fields in which New Jersey
has strength or potential, and $33 million for
undergraduate occupational and professional
degree programs in scientific, technical, and
engineering-related fields. The Commission on

ERLC

Science and Technology administers the research
programs, at advanced technology centers (ATCs),
and the Board of Higher Education, the collegiate
educational programs. 1986-87 saw groundbreak-
ing ceremonies for three ATCs - the Advanced
Technology Center for Hazardous and Toxic Sub-
stance Management at NJIT, the core facility of the
New Jersey Center for Advanced Biotechnology
and Medicine (CABM) at the adjoining Piscataway
campuses of UMDNI and Rutgers, and the Cen-
ter for Ceramics Research, also at Rutgers. (Two
others are expected to break ground during 1987-88.)

Status of Educational Portion-Funded Projects

The legislation designated $23 million of
the educational portion to be distributed
competitively for instructional programs,
and $10 million for specified capital projects.

A rigorous competitive review (during 1985-86)
winnowed 41 proposals totalling $88 million.
The 17 highest-rated were selected to share the
$23 million (public senior, independent, and
community college sectors equally). The Board
of Higher Education in July 1986 approved for
further development this statewide network of
quality educational programs (Figure 2).

Nine projects advanced in 1986-87 in accord-
ance with a multistage review process established
by the Department before the competition began.
R>ur of the nine (at Stevens Institute of Tech-
nology, Seton Hall University, Rutgers University
at Newark, and Union County College) completed
the process and received final approval from the
Board of Higher Education; work at these insti-
tutions is already underway. (The eight other
projects are expected to advance in FY 1988.)

Figure 6. Statewide Distribution of Projects Recommended for Funding Under the Jobs, Science and Technology Bond Act

- rflCfO^ MM fUOWCUMT' DKM* > COTnpiBOf^ -

Ufilovt OwvH^y .OoA^^i^ . H . '

•uf¥pywig, mot. md. lecn., otner teen.

fWertee>; rotftne i#clinofogy;**

FeJrieigh Dickinson Urtversfty

Itejem^^

S^vonifn^

bkrtectinc4ow V,
Bmokd<i< ConWm

Monmouth College

:e4ectrmic : ^ cxNiiputer
science

County Community College (2)

meomnkial - ei^rieeHn^ tochfhb^gy ,

Stocfctoii Stete CWlege -

CmrijplMd^ final project approval during 198$r87.

TCMNSilfcMifiiRMH ftNMNuWi^ Soowtf*#t# Bod Untoo 4 * ? * Willi AtfsntJc, Suritftyton, Cufnbcftafid.,01ouc#ttor f *od Stl#m * * * *Consbftkint/ with Htfdson

Annual Report on* Higher Education in* New Jersey. 1986-87 • 13

ERIC

The capital projects specified in the legislation
included a Technology Education Center at Bur-
lington County College and the Southern New
Jersey Computer Integrated Manufacturing (CIM)
Center at Camden County College, these two to
share at least $7 million in bond act support.
The rest of the $10 million was earmarked by the
Department for a CIM center to serve the northern
and central parts of the state. During 1986-87 the
Board of Higher Education approved plans for
instructional programs and facilities at the North-
ern/Central New Jersey CIM Center. The center,
located at NJIT, is comprised of 12 county colleges
with the institute as the lead institution. In addi-
tion to undergraduate instruction, it stresses
graduate-level instruction and research in elec-
tronics, computer science, hydraulics, pneumatics
and mechanical systems, as well as in robotics,
microcomputers, and computer aided drafting
and manufacturing. Development of the Southern
CIM Center continued in 1986-87 with final Board
of Higher Education approval to begin construc-
tion. The Burlington Technical Center progressed
during the year with approval and funding to
acquire land for the center.

IMPROVING UNDERGRADUATE
EDUCATION

The Department's grant programs (page 7),
the various faculty and curriculum develop-
ment efforts (page 7), and the Jobs, Science
and Technology Bond Act (discussed above)
express the commitment of the Board and De-
partment to improving collegiate instruction and
undergraduate education in New Jersey. In addi-
tion, the Board has launched a major initiative to
address a problem which threatens other efforts
and accomplishments in this regard.

Retention Initiative

After examining student retention data, the
Board of Higher Education concluded that
high rates of attrition at many New Jersey
colleges were undermining the full promise of
higher education. At its October 1986 meeting,
the Board launched a major initiative to increase
student retention and graduation rates, adopting
a seven-point agenda that included a call for each
public and independent institution to report

retention data annually to the Department, to
conduct research on factors affecting attrition and
retention on its campus, and to develop a three-
year retention improvement plan, to be updated
annually (with initial submission in May 1987).
In addition, the Board established a presidential
task force to recommend to the Chancellor appro-
priate retention goals for the variety of institu-
tions in the state, and proposed the Retention
Initiative Grant Program (to begin in FY 1988).
The Board further required annual evaluation and
reporting to the Chancellor on retention efforts of
institutions seeking state funding for those efforts.

The Board's action spurred a major mobilization
effort to meet its data collection and planning
requirements. The presidential task force on goals
recommended that each institution set goals
based on either the retention and graduation
rates of similar institutions (as identified in the
"National Drop-Out Study") or on a sample de-
veloped by the institution or another of similar
mission. The Chancellor disseminated the task
force's report to the colleges and universities to
use in developing their three-year plans. The
Department provided technical assistance for
the colleges' retention efforts by sponsoring two
conferences, at which faculty from each institu-
tion's retention planning committee participated
in a workshop format with four nationally known
retention experts.

A request for proposals for the new grant pro-
gram was released in March 1987 (the first awards
set for fall 1987). This competitive program intends
comprehensive institutional change — to improve
retention rates, to strengthen academic perfor-
mance, to improve the quality of student life, and
to increase graduation rates. It seeks campuswide
improvement - in the learning environment, the
sense of campus community, student involvement
in curricular and co-curricular pursuits, and
faculty participation in student development-
through innovative approaches, not just expanded
traditional services. Since studies indicate the
greatest attrition is in the first year, grant requests
were to focus on that period.

The new program fills a void left by the Fund for
the Improvement of Collegiate Education (FICE),
discontinued because of diminished reserves of
the Higher Education Assistance Authority, which
had funded it. In its final year (FY 1987), FICE
funded 13 grants whose primary purpose was to
improve retention and graduation rates; seven
others had this as a secondary emphasis.

14 • Annual Report on Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87

EQUITY/ACCESS

INTRODUCTION

Equal educational opportunity is more than a
commitment of the Board and Department
of Higher Education. It animates every
aspect of their mission; fundamental is the belief
that true opportunity for all New Jersey citizens
predicates educational excellence and institu-
tional viability. Specific objectives in the area of
access are realized through an array of initiatives
and programs.

TRANSFER ADVISORY BOARD

At its November 1986 meeting, the Board of
Higher Education launched an effort to
promote articulation between the public
two- and four-year colleges. The Board created
a Transfer Advisory Board (TAB) to recommend
resolutions of individual transfer problems, as
well as to address the broad issues of county
college-state college transfer articulation. (TAB
membership appears in Appendix B.) Any county
college transfer student or any institution ex-
periencing specific transfer credit problems may
raise concerns with the TAB.

The Board also mandated a study by an external
consultant to examine existing transfer articula-
tion processes in New Jersey, identify exemplary
models across the country, and address the ad-
visability of a Board of Higher Education policy
on county college transfers to Rutgers and NJIT

minority enrollment
Initiatives

Strategic Plans

During 1986-87, the state's 31 public colleges
and universities developed preliminary
strategic plans to address minority student
enrollment within the context of their institu-
tional missions. The plans, required by the Board
as part of a comprehensive statewide initiative,
were submitted to the Department and reviewed
by six outside consultants (see Appendix B) expert

in developing and implementing programs to
attract and retain minority students. The
consultants commended the institutions for the
good starts they had made and provided specific
recommendations for each to strengthen its plan.

The panel also described in general the most
important features of any institutional minority
recruitment and retention plan: measurable goals
tied to activities and timelines; a good data base
and a clear relationship with the goals and acti-
vities; trustee approval, presidential leadership,
administrative support, and faculty involvement;
a campus environment and institutional climate
perceived as hospitable by minority students
and staff; vigorous efforts to hire more minorities;

Figure 7. Black, Hispanic, and White/Other Full-Time
Undergraduate Enrollment in N.J. Colleges and Universities

Total

82-4% ;

10.3

134,502

81;8% |

10.9

141,990

11.2

153,277

82.7%

{

11.9*

154,740

83.6% ,

149,743

r~
r~

25%

50%

75%

100%

White/Other Black

' Percent distribution estimated.

I Hispanic

high school/middle school outreach, pre-college
activities, summer orientation, and freshman year
activities; information and recruitment activities
aimed at parents; recruitment goals/activities
tailored to specific minority populations and high
school locations; early warning systems, monitor-
ing, and assessment; efforts to involve employers
and community agencies/organizations extensively;
sufficient institutional financial resources; and

Annual Rbpcrt on Hici ier Education in New Jersey. 1986-87 • 15

ERLC

formative and summative evaluations of both
recruitment and retention efforts overall. Final
plans that integrate the consultants' comments
are to be submitted to the Chancellor in Sep-
tember 1987.

Pre-College Academic Programs

The Department's Pre-College Academic
Program addresses the need to increase
the enrollment of minorities in New Jersey
colleges and universities by enhancing their
academic preparation in junior and senior high
school. In 1986-87 it supported 13 pre-college
projects at urban colleges around the state. Over
1,300 minority and disadvantaged students were
served directly, through four large grants to insti-
tutions in Camden, Newark, and Trenton, and
nine smaller awards for pilot programs in other
urban areas.

These projects foster academic achievement
and strengthen disadvantaged students' college
aspirations, through basic skills and other ac-
ademic instruction and through contact with
minority faculty. The programs also motivate
and prepare the students for high technology
careers, where minorities have been underrep-
resented, by encouraging math and science study.

All program sites offer academic enrichment,
varying in both range and scope of services.

Figure 8. College-Going Rates of White, Black and Hispanic N

The most common features are: four- to six-week
academic summer programs, academic year
Saturday and after-school programs, individual
and group counseling, and career orientation, as
well as cultural awareness, speakers/role models,
physical fitness, and field trips.

Twelve programs were rated from very good to
excellent by outside evaluators, who found that
active student engagement and dynamic feedback
highlighted effective programs. (One program
experienced difficulty and is being restructured
for 1987-88. The others will be expanded, with
enrollment anticipated at over 1,600 students.)

Educational Opportunity Fund (EOF) Freshman Policy

The state's public colleges and universities
were to be enrolling, by fall 1985, at least
10% of their New Jersey freshmen through
the EOF program. (Independent institutions were
encouraged to pursue the same goal.) Fifteen
public institutions, having failed to effect the
policy, were placed on probation in 1986-87,
drawing program budget sanctions (smaller in-
creases than would have occurred ordinarily).
They also had to submit compliance plans, as did
the seven independent institutions falling short
of the goal.

Fall 1986 saw reduced to nine the number of
public institutions below the 10% EOF freshman

.J. Public High School Graduates

16 • Annual Report on Higher Education in New Jersey. 1986-87

goal. In addition, one more independent institu-
tion reached 10%, and several others demonstrated
significant commitment to and progress toward
achieving the goal. In April 1937, the EOF Board
of Directors commended all the institutions ful-
filling this important access policy and removed
from probation those that had been censured but
now met the goal; continued probation for the
New Brunswick colleges of Rutgers University for
lack of progress (except Cook College, which
showed considerable improvement under a parti-
cularly promising four-year plan to achieve the
goal); approved revised goals for the County
College of Morris and Somerset County College
(which had petitioned for new goals based on
their counties' demographics); and warned Cam-
den County College for falling below 10% after
historically exceeding the goal. (See Tables 16
through 18 in Appendix A. Table 15 presents data
on a companion policy to promote access for
nontraditional students, that of the public senior
institutions' admitting 15% of new freshmen
under special admissions programs.)

EOF Initiatives for Recruitment and Retention

A wide range of support programs -including
special summer programs, high school
articulation programs, and targeted in-
structional efforts - is available for high-risk
students through EOE The Mathematics Im-
mersion Program, the NJIT Winter Intercession,
the Cook College Initiative, the Mathematics
and Computer Science Institute, and various
pre-professional career programs are examples.

The Mathematics Immersion Program (MIP),
co-sponsored with Stevens Institute of Technol-
ogy, provides intensive mathematics instruction,
computer training, speakers, and corporate tours
to encourage students' pursuing and remaining
in math/science and technology majors. The pro-
gram's second, three-week session (in summer
1986) served 32 EOF sophomores and juniors
representing all institutional sectors and a variety
of majors. Their progress and post-test perfor-
mance made them eligible to enroll in pre-calculus,
calculus, and certain computer programming
courses at their institutions the following aca-
demic year.

The NJIT Intersession focuses on improving
freshman performance and persistence, with a
highly structured, intensive two-week program
between the fall and spring semesters. The
program targets students whose fall academic

performance in certain courses was marginal,
to help prepare them better for the courses'
spring segments.

The EOF program at Cook College is develop-
ing an extended, 42-week freshman program
modeled after Project SOAR (at Xavier University
in Louisiana.) One of the current program's three
segments is Solid Groundwork in Math and
Science (Solid GIMS). For students who have
completed freshman year, it stresses developing
their analytical reasoning skills, reinforced through
college science courses. ("Solid GIMS" is the
foundation for the planned extended freshman
year, due to begin in 1988-89.)

The Mathematics and Computer Science Institute
at Trenton State College, in its second year, enrolled
20 high school seniors (from Mercer and Burling-
ton Counties) in a five-waek, summer residential
program. Courses covered probability, problem
solving, and using FORTRAN to apply mathema-
tical concepts. During senior year, participants
♦ecurned for 14 Saturday sessions, which included
SAT preparation and an overview of more advanced
mathematics and computer science concepts.

Seton Hall University's Pre-Medical/Pre-Dental
and Pre-Medical Programs and the Montclair
State College Health Careers Program help disad-
vantaged and minority students prepare for
professional careers. The programs feature
summer internships.

SHEEO Task Force

New Jersey has also taken a leadership role
nationally in promoting state -level action
to address minority issues in higher ed-
ucation. In 1986, Chancellor Hollander chaired
a task force on minority student achievement
for the professional organization of State Higher
Education Executive Officers (SHEEO). SHEEOs
from 16 states served on the task force and, under
his leadership, developed a major policy paper
that was adopted unanimously by the organiza-
tion's full membership at their annual meeting
in July 1987. The task force report, which drew
national attention, called for SHEEOs to take the
initiative in making the achievement of minority
students a preeminent priority for the higher
education community in their respective states.
It charged SHEEOs to develop and implement
comprehensive and systematic plans of action
based on documented state needs and broadly
collaborative efforts. Specific recommendations
included such imperatives as removing econo-

Annual Report on Higher Education' in New Jersey, 1986-87 • 17

ERLC

\22

mic barriers to college attendance, increasing
involvement with students (and their teachers
and parents) in the pre-college years, and adopt-
ing measures to encourage and support com-
mitment at the institutional level.

BASIC SKILLS

Testing and Placement

1 988 will mark ten years since New Jersey
colleges first administered the New Jersey
College Basic Skills Placement (NJCBSPT)
to identify educationally underprepared students.
More than 500,000 entering students have been
tested over the years at the state's public colleges
and universities and voluntarily participating
independent institutions. Sadly the percentages
of students entering without the requisite skills
have not diminished. The most recent NJCBSPT
data (fall 1986) indicate that, statewide, 33% lack
proficiency in verbal skills, 47% in computation,
and 60% in elementary algebra. Similar propor-
tions have obtained each year since the testing
program's inception. (Test results for 1986 high
school graduates are not significantly different
than for all students.) The colleges have made
prodigious efforts in providing remediation for
the thousands lacking proficiency in the basic
skills. These efforts have reduced the possibility,
for many students, that the "open door of higher
education" will become a "revolving door," and in
the process, New Jersey has developed a national
reputation for one of the most effective systems
of basic skills testing and remediation.

Pre-College Preparation

The Basic Skills Council's reports on NJCBSPT
results each year have highlighted the need
for students to use their high school years
to prepare more effectively for college. Further-
more, the Joint Statewide Task Force on Pre-
College Preparation recommended (in its 1984
report) a brochure for eighth-graders stressing
the importance of their high school years and
their choices of courses and programs. This year,
the Basic Skills Assessment Program published
"Futures" (based in part on a similar brochure
prepared by the California Roundtable on Educa-
tional Opportunity) which emphasizes the good
start that young people can get on "building their

18 • Annual Report on Higher Education* in New Jersey, 1986-87

futures" by choosing high school programs that
will keep open their options for higher education.
English and Spanish versions have been pub-
lished and distributed statewide. The New Jersey
School Boards Association and the New Jersey
School Counselors' Association have assisted
in disseminating the brochure.

Figure 9. Full-Time Faculty at (Mew Jersey Public Colleges
and Universities, by Ethnicity

7,000

6,000

. n

5,000

500

400

300

v y

200

100

1981 1983 1985
White/Other

1981 1983 1985
Black

1981 1983 1985
Hispanic

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION

Biennial Report on College Faculty/Staff

Since 1973 the Board of Higher Education
has been publicly committed to system-
wide implementation of affirmative action
programs, looking to the institutional govern-
ing boards as the appropriate bodies to fulfill
this commitment.
The public colleges and universities submit

ERLC

affirmative action status reports biennially on all
faculty and staff, the most recent of which (for
the 1985-86 academic year) were received during
1986-87. Highlights included: progress for women,
blacks, and Hispanics in absolute numbers and
as a percentage of all executives and administra-
tors; gains also in the professional category, over
the long term (since 1977; more recently, however,
progress has slowed for women and blacks, and
reversed for Hispanics); fewer faculty, with at-
tendant modest increases in the percentages of
black, Hispanic, and women faculty; nevertheless,
continued minimal representation of Hispanics
on the faculties.

The colleges also report annually on newly hired
faculty. The proportions of minorities and women
among new faculty appointments in 1985-86
continued to exceed those in the total full-time
faculty workforce: 11.7% compared with 7.6% for
minorities, 46% compared with 33% for women.
More minorities but fewer women than in the
past were hired to teach business, the natural
sciences, health, engineering/architecture, and
computer science. The proportion of minorities
newly hired in these disciplines rose from 43.5%
in 1982 (the first year such data were collected)
to 57.1% in 1985, while that of women decreased
from 55.4% to 52%. Minority hiring in these high-
demand fields is approaching the overall rate;
about 62% of all faculty appointments each year
are in these areas. Annual faculty turnover rates
for minorities and women are higher than for
whites and males (Hispanics, 6.8%; blacks, 6.6%;
and women, 5.8%. The rate for whites/others is
4.8%, while the overall rate is 5.0%).

These findings prompted the Board's resolution
that the Department act to recruit and retain
on college faculties outstanding minorities and
women. The Board recommended encouraging
maximum effort at the research institutions to
attract experienced minorities to senior faculty
ranks; joining the public colleges and universities
in support of an early retirement bill (see page 6)
and encouraging them to hire minorities and
women for the vacated positions; encouraging
post-appointment mentoring systems for women
and minority faculty, to provide support net-
works for those seeking tenure appointments;
and funding projects to disseminate the results of
successful institutional efforts in attracting mi-
nority faculty. The Board also recommended a
five-year expansion plan for the Minority Aca-
demic Career program (see below) which would

increase by more than one-half the projected
participation supportable by current funding
levels and begin to address the projected need for
minority faculty in the 1990s.

Doctoral Program for Minorities

The Minority Academic Career (MAC) Pro-
gram, in its second year in 1986-87, seeks to
increase the presence of under-represented
minorities on New Jersey college and university
faculties by enlarging the pool of doctorally quali-
fied minority candidates. A key program feature
is sustained financial support during full-time
doctoral study, through stipends and through
opportunities for interest-free loans and loan
redemption service. MAC supported 20 fellows in
1986-87, including eight from an earlier, pilot
program (at Rutgers) and twelve new students;
three are sponsored by state colleges. Their aver-
age age was 32. Eleven were black; eight were
Hispanic; and one, Asian. They were pursuing
degrees in the physical and life sciences, mathe-
matics, the social sciences, and the humanities,
at Drew, Fairleigh Dickinson, and Rutgers Univer-
sities, and Stevens Institute of Technology. (MAC
fellows may study at any New Jersey doctoral
institution, including Princeton and Seton Hall
Universities, NJIT, and UMDNJ as well.) Minority
faculty and nonteaching professionals from any
college in the state also are eligible to apply to
the program, as are baccalaureate or master's
graduates not currently affiliated with a New
Jersey college or university.

A five-year expansion plan has been developed
to increase the program's maximum enrollment to
75 students by 1992. (The NJHEAA allocated
$764,000 for the first year's expansion, pending
authorization through the state's FY 1988 budget.)
A key element of the plan is to increase the
number of sponsored MAC fellows, that is, those
with a college's commitment for a faculty ap-
pointment upon completion of the doctorate,
in return for teaching at that college, usually for
four years.

A statewide MAC Advisory Committee proposes
policy and reviews applications. In addition,
the eight doctoral institutions share information
and coordinate recruitment and program devel-
opment activities such as MAC Fellows' Day (in
April 1987), which brought together for the first
time MAC fellows and college representatives, for
opportunties to become acquainted and to explore
sponsorship possibilities.

Annual Report on Higher Education in Nlw Jlrsky, 1986-87 • 19

STUDENT ASSIS1ANCE

State Programs

The Department of Higher Education and
its policy boards (the Student Assistance
Board, the Educational Opportunity Fund
Board of Directors, and the New Jersey Higher
Education Assistance Authority, whose members
are listed in Appendix B) administer a full range
of financial aid programs to assist New Jersey
students. Most assistance is based on financial
need (such as Tuition Aid and Educational Op-
portunity Fund Grants), some on merit (such
as Garden State Graduate Fellowships and Dis-
tinguished Scholarships), and some on both
(Garden State Scholarships). During 1986-87
these programs awarded 65,000 financial aid
grants totalling $65 million to students attending
New Jersey colleges and universities. In addition,
90,000 loans totalling $200 million were guaran-
teed. (See Tables 4 and 5 in Appendix A.)

Tuition Aid Grant (TAG) Funding/Tuition Policy

The TAG program coalesces the student
assistance and tuition policies of the Board
of Higher Education. The former policy
accommodates rising, and varying, tuition charges;
the latter posits an appropriate relationship be-
tween tuition (at public institutions) and the
institutions' educational costs-undergraduates,
through tuition, should contribute a "fair share"

of approximately 30%. (See Table 3 in Appen-
dix A.) Rising costs have resulted, of course,
in increased tuition.

The TAG program's schedule of awards provides
grants based upon both the tuition at each stu-
dent's college and the student's ability to pay.
The neediest students at public colleges and
universities receive full-tuition awards. (At in-
dependent institutions in 1986-87, the neediest
received grants of $2,650, or about 43% of the
average charge in the sector.) To offset award
reductions in the federal Pell grant program, the
Student Assistance Board increased TAG awards
for low- and moderate- income students by $150
above the originally scheduled amount.

Federal Programs

Federally funded programs (such as Pell
Grants, College Work-Study, and the loan
programs) are the major source of financial
aid to New Jersey students. The New Jersey
Higher Education Assistance Authority (NJHEAA)
administer?- two federal educational loan pro-
grams, the Guaranteed Student Loans (GSL) and
the PLUS loans, serving as the primary agency
guaranteeing loans for New Jersey students.

Because of recent changes in federal interstate
banking practices, "national" guarantors have
been competing with state agencies and now
guarantee about one-quarter of all GSL loans.
The impact on NJHEAA's student loan volume
has been significant - GSL volume declined
nearly 30% in the last two years, to about 5200

Figure 10. Average Total Tuition Charges and Net Tuition Paid by TAG Recipients

$6,000

= 5,000

= 4,000

= 3,000

= 2,000

= i,ooo

«**yr II ^ II I IJI

83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87
Community Colleges

83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87
State Colleges

Average Net Tuition

83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87
Rutgers University

83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87
Independent Colleges

Average TAG Award

20 • Annual Report on Higher Education' in New Jersey, 1986-87

million in 1986-87. The Higher Education Amend-
ments of 1986 (reauthorization) also introduced
major changes in federal student loan programs,
restricting eligibility but raising loan limits in
1987-88. To reassess the NJHEAA role in a rapidly
changing student loan market, the Board of
Higher Education established a Committee to
Study the Current and Future Operations of the
Loan Authority. The committee will report its
recommendations to the Board next year.

The "campus-based" federal programs (College
Work-Study, NDSL loans, and SEOG grants)
were funded at about the same level as in pre-
vious years (despite rising costs to students).
The Pell grant program, however, was seriously
underfunded in 1986-87, resulting in a nearly 20%
loss in federal grant aid to undergraduates at New
Jersey colleges and universities. (Pell funding to
the proprietary institutions was nearly the same
as the previous year.) About 30% of the college
students received smaller grants, while 15% lost
ther eligibility entirely. For the first time, the ma-
jor state programs, for which only college students
are eligible, provided more total aid than Pell,
30% of which goes to proprietary school students.

Although increased state and institutional aid
has partially offset federal reductions, total educa-

Hflure 11. Pell Grants and State Grants to N.J.
Postsecondary Institutions

$69,20

$58.90

$60.10

$56.30

1985-86 1986-87

Pell Grants

TAG, EOF and Pell Grants Rgg to Proprietary

GSS Grants to Colleges §3 Schools

tional expenses (tuition, fees, room and board,
etc.) have continued to rise; as a result, respon-
sibility for financing college has shifted to stu-
dents and their families, whose share of total
expenses has increased from 60% to over 70% in
the last five years.

Student Aid Committee

The Board of Higher Education adopted in
May 1987 the report of a special committee
it established to study New Jersey's future
student assistance needs and to recommend
appropriate initiatives. A continuing decline in
federal financial aid funds and a developing fed-
eral policy to shift a larger proportion of educa-
tional costs onto the states and students and their
families occasioned the committee and its study.

The report, Meeting the Challenge of Rising Higher
Education Costs, includes twenty recommenda-
tions to address the priorities of access, excellence,
efficiency, and financing alternatives. Included
are proposals for increasing TAG awards to include
required fees, establishing programs to aid single
parents and part-time students, creating an urban
scholars program, and creating a guaranteed
tuition prepayment plan for New Jersey colleges.

Services to Veterans

About 3,000 veterans, eligible dependents,
and active military service members at-
tended New Jersey colleges and universities
in 1986-87 under the GI Bill. The Department
of Higher Education approves all college-level
training in New Jersey under this federal legisla-
tion, reviewing information such as accreditation,
standards for progress, and course content to
ensure all state and federal requirements are met
and maintained.

The 100th U.S. Congress enacted and the Pres-
ident signed into law in June 1987, a "permanent"
GI Bill. The Montgomery Bill offers a sizeable
basic entitlement and additional incentives, and
the new educational benefits are expected to
affect college enrollments. The Army alone enlists
more than 100,000 recruits annually; each y<»ar
more than 80,000 leave active duty after their first
enlistment. More than half of these new veterans
will have enrolled in the new program. In addi-
tion, reservists will be eligible for the first time,
adding to the already substantial pool of potential
GI Bill students. It is anticipated that by 1995,
10% of all college students will be attending
school under this federal program.

Annual Report on Higher Education New Jersey. 1986-87 • 21

SPECIAL ISSUES

INTRODUCTION

Self-scrutiny marks the special efforts of
1986-87 - to establish comprehensive,
systemwide assessment and data collection;
to examine critical issues in medical education;
and to chart new courses for important sectors of
New Jersey's higher education system.

ASSESSMENT

Assessment informs decisions about the
performance of individuals or programs,
either to improve it or to impose conse-
quences. The issue of how best to render such
judgments holds for higher education the most
serious implications for creating, substantiating,
and perpetuating access and excellence. The sub-
ject has sparked intense debate in New Jersey's
higher education community, in connection with
both new and ongoing assessment initiatives -
the New Jersey Basic Skills Assessment Program
and the College Outcomes Evaluation Program.
Each is discussed below.

Basic Skills Effectiveness

Over the years since its inception, the Basic
Skills Assessment Program (see page 18)
has evolved beyond testing and placement
of students to include comprehensive assessment
of college remedial programs. To evaluate consis-
tently, appropriately, and fairly requires a variety
of measures. Among those considered by the
Basic Skills Council (which administers the pro-
gram), results of remediated students 7 post-testing
are especially important, in that they provide a
common, nonrelative basis for judging program
effectiveness. Therefore, the Board of Higher
Education, upon the recommendation of the
Basic Skills Council, resolved that ". . .beginning
in September 1987, all public colleges and univer-
sities are required to employ students 7 perform-
ance on an appropriate standardized post-test
as one of the multiple criteria required for all
students to exit a remedial course sequence; and
that post-test data must be reported in aggregate
form to the Basic Skills Council. . ." These data
are expected to reveal whether proficiency stand-
ards to enter college-level courses are the same

22 • Annual Report on Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87

for all students, regardless of their completing
remediation or not needing it in the first place.

College Outcomes Evaluation Program (COEP)

A broadly constituted advisory committee
(representing higher education, business
and industry, government, and elementary/
secondary education) has been formulating the
specifics of the College Outcomes Evaluation
Program (COEP). COEP was created in June 1985
by the Board of Higher Education (BHE) to pro-
mote high standards of undergraduate learning
and performance, maintain public confidence in
higher education, and contribute to educational
excellence overall in New Jersey. The program is
grounded in the principle that institutions should
not be judged solely on resources (such as num-
bers of library books or academic qualifications
of students), as they traditionally have been, but
also should demonstrate how well they use those
resources -for the students they enroll, for the
faculty and staff they employ, and for society
in general.

The committee formed separate subcommittees
to explore, debate, and recommend appropriate
institutional assessments in four key areas-
student learning, student development, faculty
accomplishment, and ext rains titutional impacts.
(Their collective two-year effort is to culminate
in a major report by the advisory committee in
fall 1987.)

The student learning subcommittee divided
educational outcomes into four broad categories—
general intellectual skills, modes of inquiry, ap-
preciation of ethical issues, and in-depth study
(the major). It recommended that each institution
conduct its own assessments in the last three
areas. For general intellectual skills, however,
it proposed a statewide assessment to provide
information on institutional performance, but not
to serve as a gateway exam for individual students.
In May 1987, the Department issued a Request for
Proposals (RFP) to over 100 testing companies for
an innovative, task-oriented instrument suitable
for statewide use. A two-year contract to help
design and pilot-test the instrument is expected
to be awarded in fall 1987.

The student development/post-collegiate activi-
ties subcommittee proposed assessing students
in five areas: academic performance and status
(for example, graduation rates), knowledge and
competency (as measured by licensure exams, for
example), personal development (for example,

values and leadership), the undergraduate ex-
perience (such as involvement in learning and
activities), and post-collegiate activities of both
"completers" and "noncompleters" (employment
data, further education, public service, and satis-
faction with the undergrad uate experience) .

The research, scholarship, and creative expres-
sion subcommittee focused on faculty activities.
They recommended that the institutions identify
appropriate activities and outcomes consonant
with their individual missions and objectives, but
based on broadly inclusive matrices developed by
the subcommittee. Ultimately, common indicators
may emerge within a sector, or across the entire
system. The subcommittee stressed, however, that
the Department of Higher Education should use
any such data only to evaluate institutional suc-
cess in meeting objectives, not to assess the per-
formance of individual faculty members.

The community/society outcomes subcommittee
focused on the effects of institutions on their local
communities and on the wider society. Assisted
by external consultants, the subcommittee created
three matrices categorizing the range of possible
impacts on a variety of audiences. From these,
the subcommittee selected those "common" to
all public institutions, for which standard data
should be collected and reported — access, econ-
omic impact (such as effect on local employment),
and impact on the development of "human capital"
(the needs, for example, of government or the
private sector). Institutions are to explore other
outcomes in light of their individual missions
and objectives. To assist in developing assessment
models for community/society outcomes, the
Department issued an RFP. Seven projects were
funded, ranging from a study of values transmis-
sion to a methodology for using census tract data.

The COEP advisory committee hosted two
statewide conferences during 1986-87. Three
hundred educators participated in an October
1986 conference; almost 400 New Jersey faculty
and administrators discussed draft subcommittee
recommendations in May 1987, after hearing from
Governor Kean and others on the importance of
outcomes assessment. The Governor said:
The public believes in you. They have acted
on that belief by providing increases in
public support — I happen to think that the
college outcomes evaluation program, the
approach taken by the Board of Higher Ed-
ucation, is the right one Don't give the

people what you think they want. Go back

to the promises you made Design an

assessment that is real, that has integrity,
that you believe in, [that] reflects] the best
traditions of higher learning

STUDENT UNIT RECORD
ENROLLMENT (SURE) SYSTEM

Overview

The SURE system was designed to strength-
en the capacity of the New Jersey Board of
Higher Education to perform its monitoring,
coordinating, and program evaluation responsi-
bilities. It is a comprehensive data collection and
information storage and retrieval process for
computer-readable files of complete data records
for each student enrolled. Participating New
Jersey colleges and universities submit tapes
containing these cross-sectional files to the De-
partment of Higher Educations (DHE) Office of
Policy, Research, and Information Systems, which
processes and analyzes the data. (Records on
each year's graduates are submitted separately.)

There are 78 data elements to be reported for
each student. The student data available when
the SURE system is complete include conven-
tional demographic, academic background, and
education process variables, as well as financial
aid, basic skills, and EOF program data. (The
Department anticipates, however, that some
information modules may be completed for only
a sample of students when the fall enrollment
tapes are submitted.)

Certain principles guided the strategic devel-
opment of the SURE system. Major concerns
included maintaining confidentiality of the data
and designing the data base to facilitate research.
New regulations for all the Department's compu-
terized information, adopted by the Board of
Higher Education in December 1986, responded
to the former. File structure design and organi-
zation, programming language requirements,
and data residence addressed the latter concern.
In addition, the Department will employ power-
ful, flexible software and will make the SURE
programs it develops accessible to participants.
(Two other major concerns were the desirability
of standard reports and the need for incremental
implementation of the system, discussed below.)

Annual Report on Higher Education' ik New Jersey. 1986-87 • 23

ERLC

ERIC

Figure 12. Design of the SURE System

Core Data
Tapes Received
From Institutions

Notify Institution
To Correct Tapes

Matcn tr Marge

•To"

Data Tape Her

Spec*

Report *
Generator
Aggregated Data

_ / Freshmen l

(Transfers)

'86

Institutional „

■HEGIS

Standard'';

FormsTo

Reports To
f Board v

/NCES

System Implementation

SURE system data elements have been organized
to permit an orderly, incremental development
of the data base. Due to its size and the com-
plexity of the project, the SURE system could not be
created and made fully operational at once, and so a
five-year, phased implementation plan was devel-
oped. In the first year (1985-86), the state colleges
initiated system development. They were joined on a
test basis in 1986-87 by 15 of the 19 community col- .
leges. (The public universities will submit their initial
SURE tapes in fall 1987. Independent colleges wishing
to participate are required to do so by fall 1989.)

24 • ANNUAl.RErORTO\'HlCHEREDUCATIO\M\'NEWjERSEy,1986-87

Output

SURE System data will be used by DHE to per-
form certain routine analyses, and the gener-
ated reports will be reviewed by the institu-
tions. There will be hard-copy tables containing
aggregate statistics which are required forvarious
federal and state reports. In addition, serially con-
structed data sets will be produced for longitudinal
studies of retention, attrition, and other issues where
temporal relationships are important. Participating
institutions can obtain modified versions of the
longitudinal files for legitimate research purposes,
as well as the Participant Use Tapes with all the cross-
sectional data modified in accordance with depart-
mental policies to prevent the disclosure of confiden-
tial information.

HEALTH PROFESSIONS
EDUCATION POLICY
INITIATIVES

Physician Licensure Standards

After nearly a year of careful study and
extensive discussions with national experts
in medical education, a joint committee
of the Board of Higher Education and the New
Jersey State Board of Medical Examiners issued a
report, Strengthening Educational and Licensure
Standards for Physicians in New Jersey. Formation
of this committee (empaneled in fall 1985) reflected
growing publicity and public concerns about
questionable medical education practices in some
foreign medical schools and fraudulent creden-
tials among some recent applicants for physician
licenses.

Key recommendations of the report specify the
educational preparation of physician candidates
before they could be considered for a plenary
license to practice in New Jersey. These include:
a baccalaureate degree (or its equivalent) prior
to medical school entry; a comprehensive medical
education program of at least thirty-two months
over four academic years; and three years of
graduate medical education (residency training)
or proof of eligibility for speciality board certifi-
cation. The Board of Higher Education endorsed
the report at its March 1987 meeting. The Board
of Medical Examiners took similar action in May.

Graduate Medical Education

Two broadly constituted task forces of the
Advisory Graduate Medical Education
Council (AGMEC), addressing issues of
scope and quality and of financing, met for nearly
a year- to produce their fall 1986 combined report,
The Next Generation of Physicians. The Board of
Higher Education in September 1984 had estab-
lished a general framework for future planning
and development of the state's residency training
programs. UMDNJ President and AGMEC Chair-
man Stanley S. Beigen appointed the two panels
to recommend specific strategies for implemen-
ting the policy directions of the prospectus.

The advisory council endorsed the combined
report in December 1986. Among the recommen-
dations are: strengthening the academic base of
all residency training programs in New Jersey by
encouraging closer medical school affiliations,
improving their responsiveness to changes in
the health care environment by developing new
training settings and modalities, planning for
a phased reduction in the total number of resi-
dency positions statewide, and imposing greater
admissions selectivity.

The Board of Higher Education in March 1987
directed the report's distribution to all providers
of graduate medical education in the state. The
Board also authorized the Chancellor to estab-
lish a committee that will develop strengthened
standards of excellence for residency programs,
and also assist the Department of Health and the
Hospital Rate Setting Commission in determining
appropriate reimbursement to hospitals which
train residents.

SECTOR STUDY COMMISSIONS

Report of the County College Panel

A panel of six distinguished, nationally
prominent, educators (see Appendix B),
appointed by the Board of Higher Educa-
tion's Academic Affairs Committee, has studied
the major educational issues affecting the county
community colleges 7 future health and vitality.
(In January 1986 Governor Kean, noting "un-
evenness ,/ in the sector, had called upon the
Board to examine the colleges and to frame sound
recommendations for the future direction of
the sector.)

The panel's comprehensive six-month study
during 1986-87 included visits to the 19 insti-
tutions, and two public hearings to obtain the
viewpoints of college officials and other interested
groups and individuals. Their May 1987 report
addressed three major areas of concern: govern-
ance, finance, and regionalization. In general,
the report emphasized the need for partnerships
and cooperative solutions, while recognizing the
colleges' accomplishments over their 20-year his-
tory, as well as the importance of this sector of
higher education that accounts for more than
one-third of all the college students in New Jersey.
In all, the panel made more than 80 recommen-
dations addressing a full range of educational
and other issues. The Board's Academic Affairs
Committee will transmit the report and recom-
mendations to the Board of Higher Education in
fall 1987.

Report of the AICUNJ Panel

The Commission on the Future of Indepen-
dent Higher Education was appointed by
the presidents of New Jersey's independent
colleges and universities. Its charge, endorsed
by Governor Thomas H. Kean, is to assess the
current resources of these institutions in light of
the educational mission they are being called
upon to perform. The commission's recommen-
dations will be addressed to the colleges, to the
Department and Board of Higher Education, to
the legislative and executive branches of state
government, and to the public at large.

The commission's assignment is to provide
"a thoughtful and comprehensive assessment of
the future of independent higher education in
New Jersey through the year 2000," studying both
internal and external environmental factors. The
assessment of the internal environment considers
enrollment trends, financial stability and health,
physical plant and capital needs, faculty, cur-
riculum, and adaptability to change. Assessment
of the external environment focuses on the ed-
ucational needs of the people of New Jersey.
Topics of special concern are: the quality of un-
dergraduate education, the underrepresentation
of minorities, the improvement of science and
technology programs, and the teaching of civic
values and social responsibility in the under-
graduate curriculum. The commission's report,
outlining ways to better utilize and complement
the resources of the institutions, will be pub-
lished in fall 1987.

Annual Report on Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87 • 25

APPENDIX A

Table 1

Original 1 net state appropriations

NEW JERSEY HIGHER EDUCATION

FY. 1978

F.Y. 1987

F.Y. 1988

($000)

% Dist.

($000)

% Dist.

($000)

% Dist.

Rutgers University

94,806

28.2%

201,561 c

28.1%

222,924 c

27.8%

NJ.I.T.

12,405

3.7%

30,614 c

4.3%

35,361 c

4.4%

U.M.D.NJ.

45,615

13.6%

118,829°

16.6%

137,174 c

17.1%

State Colleges

84,232

25.1%

185,132°

25.9%

206,197 c

25.7%

Community Colleges*

49,850

14.9%

81,863 c

11.4%

90,963 c

11.3%

Independents**

10,183

3.0%

22,687

3.2%

25,908

3.2%

Student Assistance

OC OCA

in qo£

lU.O A3

71 971

IU.U /o

79,960

10.0%

Health Professions

2,263

.7%

3,502

.5%

3,574

.5%

(SUBTOTAL) ( = 100%)

(335,718)

(88.6%)

(715,459)

(90.4%)

(802,061)

(90.9%)

Debt Service

35,889

9.5%

42,896

5.4%

44,196

5.0%

Capital:

Renewal and Replacement

5,075

1.3%

12,000

1.5%

14,750

1.7%

Central Administration

1,635

.4%

3,513

.4%

3,811

.4%

Special Projects***

840

.2%

5,241

.7%

4,045

.5%

D.H.E. Grant Programs:

Science and Technology

6,792

.9%

6,792

.8%

Humanities

2,500

.3%

2,500

.2%

For. Languages/lnt'l. Ed.

500

.1%

500

.1%

Learning Disabled

750

.1%

750

.1%

Retention Initiative

300

.0%

The Urban Initiative

1,900

.2%

2,400

.3%

Minority Academic Career Program

400

.0%

Grand Total*

$379,157

100.0%

$791,551

100.0%

$882,505

100.0%

•Operating support only; includes support for the Southern CIM Center (5300,000 in EY. 1987 and $400,000 in EY. 1988) and for the Northern/
Central CIM Center ($300,000 in EY. 1988). Community colleges receive additional state aid for debt service which is included here in that
total. Also, since EY. 1982, the colleges have received aid for pension fund payments previously paid from a central state account. These
figures are not included in the table.

** Includes (since 1977) aid to Eairleigh Dickinson University School of Dentistry.

*** Includes funding for scholarly chairs established by the Legislature. Includes also special projects such as the Basic Skills Assessment Program,
the Marine Sciences Consortium, the College Outcomes Evaluation Program, the Center for Information Age Technology (CIAT), the Drug
Information Clearinghouse, and the Governor's School, etc.

* Includes supplemental appropriations. Not included are fringe benefits, which are paid from a central state account, and salary increases,
which take effect subsequent to the passage of the original appropriation. Reflects net support, i.e., less state college revenues.

c Includes Governor's Challenge funding. State college challenge funds distributed to the colleges over a three^year period, based on estimated
cash-flow requirements in each of the three years.

28 • Annual Report on Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87

ERIC

/* C

Table 2

EY. 1987 DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION GRANT PROGRAMS*

Tech./

Compu-

Math/

Hu-

For.

Special

Eng'g.

ters in

Sci.

mani-

Lang./

Ser-

Educ.

Curric.

Tch'g.

ties

Int'l.

vices

FICE**

Total

($000)

Rutgers University

140

357

113

332

240

1,250

NJ.l.T.

103

188

U.M. D.N.J.

239

359

State Colleges

744

539

448

775

2,739

Community Colleges

1,251

448

100

349

131

2,431

Independents

632

742

273

673

137

664

3,121

SUBTOTAL*

$2,797

$2,325

$ 656

$1,623

$ 403

$ 389

$1,895

$10,088

Central Projects/

Administration

212

214

487

591

100

112

1,806

TOTAL

$3,009

$2,539

$1,143

$2,214

$ 503

$ 479

$2,007

$11,894***

(Original

Appropriation)

( 2,873)

( 2,919)

( 1,000)

( 2,500)

( 500)

( 750)

( 2,000)

( 12,542)

*The grant programs are: Technical/ Engineering Education (which includes a Technological Literacy and a Cooperative Education sub-grant),
Computers in Curricula; Mathematics, Science, and Computer Science Teaching Improvement, New Jersey Humanities, New Jersey foreign
Language; New Jersey International Education; Higher Education Services for Special Needs Students, and the Fund for the Improvement of
Collegiate Education (FICE).

**New Jersey Higher Education Assistance Authority reserves supported the FICE program.

••Includes cany forward funds from F.Y. 1986.

*A total of 263 projects were funded, including 56 at the community colleges, 63 at the state colleges, 85 at the independents, 44 at Rutgers, 6 at
NJ.l.T, and 9 at U.M.D.NJ. 6

ERLC

Annual Report on Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87 • 29

Table 3

TUITION AS A PERCENT OF EDUCATIONAL COSTS IN NEW JERSEY
PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL SECTORS, BY STUDENT TYPE

Policy 1979-80 1983-84 1984-85 1985-86 1986-87 1987-88

Rutgers University*

unuergrau. nes.

ou /o

4LH.KJ /O

28.2%

29.2%

28.0%

29.6%

Undergrad: Non-Res.

45%

48.1%

59.2%

56.4%

58.5%

55.9%

59.2%

Graduate: Res.

45%

34.2%

42.1%

40.2%

41.6%

39.8%

42.1%

Graduate: Non-Res.

45%

49.4%

60.7%

57.8%

60.0%

57.4%

60.8%

NJ.I.T.

Undergrad: Res.

30%

20.7%

28.4%

29.3%

29.9%

26.1%

27.5%

Undergrad: Non-Res.

45%

41.3%

56.8%

58.6%

59.9%

52.3%

55.0%

Graduate: Res.

45%

29.4%

37.8%

41.4%

42.4%

37.0%

38.6%

Graduate: Non-Res.

45%

42.5%

54.4%

59.7%

61.0%

53.3%

55.6%

U.M.D.N.J.**

Undergrad: Res.

30%

20.3%

26.3%

27.0%

25.0%

24.9%

21.4%

State Colleges* **

Undergrad: Res.

30%

29.1%

30.1%

30.4%

27.9%

26.2%

25.3%

Undergrad: Non-Res.

45%

57.0%

48.8%

48.3%

42.9%

39.3%

36.9%

Graduate: Res.

45%

43.7%

45.1%

45.6%

41.8%

39.3%

37.4%

Graduate: Non-Res.

45%

62.7%

59.2%

59.0%

53.1%

49.2%

46.0%

Community Colleges* * * *

County Residents 30% 30.7% 30.0% 30.0% 27.2% 26.3% 26.0%

* Beginning in 1983-84, Rutgers established differential tuition rates for the undergraduate professional colleges and, at the graduate level, for
the M.B.A. programs. (Differential rates reflect higher costs associated with these programs,) Displayed here are the percentages for tuition at
the undergraduate arts a..d sciences colleges and at the graduate schools except as noted above.

** For purposes of the tuition policy, U.M.D.N.J.'s state resident medical and dental students are considered undergraduates, i e., tuition is to be
30% of costs. Tuition for nonstate residents in the medical and dental programs is 31.3% above the charge for state residents. Tuition for
graduate students (School of Biomedical Sciences) is the same as at Rutgers. Tuition for students in the School of Health-Related Professions
varies according to academic level and length of program.

*** The state college autonomy legislation empowers each college's board of trustees to establish its own tuition, which they first did for the
1987-88 academic year. The percentages for that year, therefore, reflect sector averages. (In previous years the Board of Higher Education
established uniform, sector wide tuition rates.)

**** The maximum allowable tuition, as established by the Board of Higher Education, for a full-time in-county student is used in these
calculations. The actual tuition at individual colleges may be lower.

30 • AnnualReportonHigherEducationinNewJersey, 1986-87

Table 4

NEW JERSEY STATE STUDENT GRANT PROGRAMS

# of Student Awards Amount of Awards ($000)

1985-86

1986-87

1985-86

1986-87

Tuition Aid Grant (TAG)

44707

41,878

$45,893

$48,570

Educational Opportunity Fund (EOF)

12,053

11,747

7,031

8,252

EOF Summer Program

3,451

3,431

3,252

3,889

Garden State Scholarship

7,451

6,752

3,381

3,333

Distinguished Scholars Program

699

1,480

685

1,451

Garden State Graduate Fellowship

420

449

EOF-Graduate Program

192

175

528

488

Public Tuition Benefits and POW/MI A

Veterans Tuition Credit

626

553

164

110

Vietnam Veterans Aid

139

162

TOTAL ALL PROGRAMS*

69,417

66,289

$61,502

$66,678

•Students may receive awards from more than one program. For example, most EOF and GSS students also receive a Tuition Aid Grant.
PROGRAM CHANGES IN 1986-87:

TAG maximum awards were raised to current year average tuition m the public sectors and to $2,650 in the independent sector.
Garden State Scholarship maximum awards were raised to S 1,000.

j£* %1 * . Annual Report on Higher Education' in* New Jersey, 1986-87 • 31

Table 5

GUARANTEED STUDENT LOAN PROGRAMS

# of Loans

Amount of Loans ($000)

1985-86

1986-87

1985-86

1986-87

Guaranteed Student Loans

94,321

83,354

$230,242

$207,504

PLUS Loans

6,893

4,653

18,968

12,961

Public Loans (State-funded)

136

401

240

Computer Science Faculty Development*

154

Minority Academic Career Program

135

TOTAL LOAN VOLUME BY PROGRAM

101,406

88,119

$249,765

$220,840

NJ. Colleges and Universities

37,733

33,331

$ 85,334

$76,888

N.J. Proprietary Schools

18,354

13,024

43,275

31,144

Out-bf-State Institutions

45,319

41,764

121,156

112,808

TOTAL LOAN VOLUME BY SECTOR

•State-funded loan redemption program.

Table 6

101,406

88,119

$249,765

$294,439

ACADEMIC INDEX DATA FOR FULLTIME FIRST-TIME FRESHMEN AT
NEW JERSEY PUBLIC SENIOR INSTITUTIONS

8AI*

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

N.J.l.T.

100.0

101.9

102.3

103.8

104.2

106.6

Rutgers University

100.0

102.8

103.7

103.2

102.8

103.7

Glassboro

100.0

101.6

103.7

104.7

105.2

105.8

106.3

Jersey City

100.0

102.9

104.6

104.0

101.2

105.8

108.1

Kean

100.0

100.5

103.7

103.2

Montclair

100.0

101.0

102.0

101.0

102.9

Ramapo

100.0

102.6

101.0

104.2

103.1

100.5

101.6

Stockton

100.0

103.7

104.7

104.2

105.2

104.2

Trenton

100.0

102.0

102.4

104.9

102.4

104.9

107.3

Wm. Paterson

100.0

101.6

103.8

104.3

104.8

105.9

•Average of AIs for fall 1978, 1979, and 1980. Each institution's actual BAI was set equal to 100 for comparison with its AI in subsequent years

32 • Annual Reporton Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87

Table 7

New degree programs approved by the new jersey
board of higher education, by collegiate sector and
degree level: 1986-87

Associate

Bachelor's

Master's

Doctoral

iota!

Rutgers University

N.J.LT.

N.A.

U.M.D.N.J.

N.A.

State Colleges

N.A.

Community Colleges

14**

N.A.

Independents/Proprietaries***

TOTAL NEW PROGRAMS

N.A. - College(s) not authorized to grant degrees of this type.
•Includes a cooperative program in applied physics between Rutgers-Newark (B.A.) and New Jersey Institute of Technology (B.S.).
••Includes eight A.A.S. degree programs in computer integrated manufacturing (CIM) offered by colleges of the Northern/Central CIM
Consortium, Bergen and Brookdale Community Colleges; Essex, Middlesex, and Union County Colleges; and Hudson, Mercer, and Passaic
County Community Colleges were authorized to grant degrees. Approval of other consortium members' programs is pending,

•••The associate degree program reflects new licensure of a proprietary institution (Katharine Gibbs School, Montclair). Not included is the
reauthorization of an existing Ph.D. at Fairleigh Dickinson University.

Not reflected in the counts: the authorization for three out-of«state institutions to offer course work.

Table 8

total degrees conferred in new jersey colleges
and Universities, by type of degree

F. Y.

F.Y.

% Change

1977-78

1984-85

■ 1985-86

One-Year

Eight -Year

Sub-Associate

1,059

783

868

10.9

-18.0

Associate

10,675

10,126

9,911

-2.1

-7.2

Bachelor's

25,086

23,765

23,454

-1.3

-6.5

Master's

8,130

6,547

6,320

-3.5

-22.3

Doctorate

713

690

677

-1.9

-5.0

First-Professional*

1,364

1,743

1,772

1.7

29.9

TOTAL

47,027

43,654

43,002

-1.5

-8.6

•These are degrees in law, medicine, dentistry, and the theological professions.

Annual Reporton Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87 • 33

Table S

TOTAL DEGREES CONFERRED IN NEW JERSEY COLLEGES
AND UNIVERSITIES, BY COLLEGIATE SECTOR

F.Y.
1977-78

F.Y.
1984-85

F.Y.
1985-86

% Change
One-Year Eight-Year

Rutgers University

8,719

8,702

8,819

1.3

1.1

N.J.l.T.

897

1,150

1,203

4.6

34.1

U.M.D.NJ.

332

483

590

22.2

77.7

State Colleges

13,867

10,916

10,450

-4.3

-24.6

Community Colleges

10,243

10,004

9,722

-2.8

-5.1

Independents

12,969

12,399

12,218

-1.5

-5.8

TOTAL

47,027

43,654

43,002

-1.5

-8.6

Table 10

TOTAL DEGREES CONFERRED IN NEW JERSEY COLLEGES
AND UNIVERSITIES, BY SEX AND BY ETHNICITY

F.Y.

% Change

1977-78

1984-85

1985-86

One -Year

Eight-Year

Men

23,599

20,095

19,909

-0.9

-15.6

Women

23,428

23,559

23,093

-2.0

-1.4

Blacks

3,400

2,937

2,966

1.0

-12.8

Hispanics

1,149

1,623

1,639

1.0

42.6

Whites/Others

42,478

39,094

38,397

-1.8

-9.6

TOTAL

47,027

43,654

43,002

-1.5

-8.6

34 • Annual Report on Higher Education in' New Jersey, 1986-87

total* headcount enrollment in new jersey colleges
and Universities

Fall 1978

Fall 1985

Fall 1986

% Change
One-Year Eight-Year

Rutgers University

49,987

47,646

48,539

1.9

-2.9

N.J.l.T.

5,669

7,495

7,591

1.3

33.9

U.M.D.N.J.

1,440

2,114

2,305

9.0

60.1

State Colleges

85,925

73,670

72,955

-1.0

-15.1

Community Colleges

98,721

106,372

107,250

0.8

8.6

Independents

65,469

60,358

59,116

-2.1

-9.7

GRAND TOTAL*

307,211

297,655

297,756

0.0

-3.1

Public Total*

241,742

237,297

238,640

0.6

-1.3

Undergraduate Total

259,381

253,352

253,346

0.0

-2.3

'Includes both full- and part-time students, at both undergraduate and post-baccalaureate levels.

Table 12

TOTAL* HEADCOUNT ENROLLMENT IN NEW JERSEY COLLEGES
AND UNIVERSITIES, BY SEX AND BY ETHNICITY**

Fall 1978 Fall 1985 Fall 1986

Men

148,837

48.4

136,678

45.9

136,607

45.9

Women

158,374

51.6

160,977

54.1

161,149

54.1

Blacks

31,409

10.2

27,346

9.2

26,136

8.8

Hispanlcs

11,342

3.7

16,833

5.7

16,541

5.5

Whites/Others

264,460

86.1

253,476

85.1

236,193

79.3

"Unknown"

18,886

6.3

TOTAL

307,211

100.0

297,655

100.0

297,756

100.0

•Includes bolh full- and part-time students, at both undergraduate and post«baccalaureate levels.

••Fall 1986 data by race/ethnicity are not com/wraWr with previous years. Prior to fall 1986, colleges reported enrollments on Higher Education
General Information Survey (HEGIS) forms, which required accounting for all students by racial/ethnic category. (The survey called for estimates
if exact counts for a category were not available.) In fall 1986, the federal government introduced a new data reporting system, the Integrated
Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), which does not carry such a requirement.

With IPEDS, it is possible for a student to be included in a college's total enrollment but not fv counted in any raciahcthmc category. Therefore,
if there are students whose race/ethnicity is unknown, the numbers reported by a college in any given category could be lower than they would
be under the HEGIS system, depending on the method of allocating unknowns the college employed in previous years.

AS'N'UAl.RErORTON'HlGIIKR EDUCATION' IN' New Jersix 1986-87 • 35

er|c

Table 13

full-time first-time freshman enrollment
by race/ethnicity, by collegiate sector: fall 1986

8lack
# %

Hispanic
# %

Other*
#

Unknown**
# %

TOTAL
(100%)

Rutgers University
NJ.I.T.

U.M. D.N.J. ISHRP)
State Colleges
Community Colleges
Independents

688
59
9

878
1,376
561

11.1
12.8
69.2
12.6
10.3
8.2

446
74

7.2
16.1

516 7.4
1,430 10.7
361 5.3

5,060
328
4

5,272
10,400
4,761

283
181
1,139

4.1
1.3
16.7

6,194
461
13
6,949
13,387
6,822

TOTAL

Table 14

3,571 10.6

2,827 8.4

25,825

1,603 4.7

33,826

FULL-TIME UNDERGRADUATE ENROLLMENT

Black

Hispanic

Other*

Unknown**

TOTAL

(100%)

Rutgers University

2,779

9.7

1,699

6.0

24,065

28,543

NJ.I.T.

287

9.0

356

11.2

2,549

3,192

U.M.D.NJ. ISHRP)

15.1

6.7

140

179

State Colleges

3,333

9.2

2,223

6.2

28,074

2,513

7.0

36,143

Community Colleges

4,587

12.3

3,854

10.3

28.224

682

1.8

37,347

Independents

2,364

8.1

1,400

4.8

22,262

3,072

10.6

29;098

TOTAL

13,377

9.9

9,544

7.1

105,314

6,267

4.7

134,502

•The "Other" category includes whites, Asians/Pacific Islanders, American Indians/Alaskan Natives, and nonresident aliens.
••Data on "race/ethnicity unknown" available for the first time in fall 1986. Prior to that, colleges were required, in reporting their enrollments,
to account for all students by racial/ethnic category; beginning in 19S6, the reports allowed for instances where such data were not available.
Therefore, the fall 1986 data are not comparable with those in previous years, which may have reflected mstitutions estimates to account for
missing data. See Table 12 for additional information.

36 ♦ Annual Report on Higher Education in 1 New Jersey, 1986-87

ERIC 40

Table 15

SPECIAL ADMITS AS A PERCENT

OF TOTAL FULL-TIME FIRST-TIME FRESHMEN

IN NEW JERSEY PUBLIC SENIOR COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

NJ.l.T.

5.8%

5.1%

7.5%

7.2%

9.7%

7.4%

Rutgers University

3.4%

4.3%

5.1%

4.9%

4.6%

6.8%

Glassboro

3.0%

7.5%

8.4%

13.4%

10.9%

12.4%

Jersey City

17.1%

17.2%

24.2%

16.9%

14.6%

21.2%

Kean

15.6%

10.3%

9.5%

9.7%

10.6%

16.1%

Montclair

7.1%

5.6%

9.1%

8.9%

10.2%

14.1%

Ramapo

12.0%

24.7%

10.6%

12.8%

9.0%

12.5%

Stockton

8.7%

10.0%

9.9%

10.8%

10.5%

11.8%

Trenton

7.3%

4.4%

9.8%

9.3%

12.1%

14.6%

Wm. Paterson

22.9%

11.0%

9.9%

9.5%

10.2%

15.3%

ERIC

AnnualReportomHigherEducationimNewJersey, 1986-87 • 37

Table 16

E.O.F. PERCENT OF NEW JERSEY FULL-TIME FIRST-TIME FRESHMEN
IN NEW JERSEY PUBLIC SENIOR COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES

# of Fall '86

E.O.F. % Of Total

N.J.

1985

1986

E.O.F

FTFTF

Camden C.A.S.

11.8

11.3

398

Newark C.A.S.

16.6

15.7

612

Nursing

17.5

37.0

Cook

6.6

7.1

466

Douglass

6.3

5.3

769

Engineering

9.4

9.1

592

Livingston

8.7

9.0

670

Rutgers

7.7*

8.1**

160**

1,980

TOTAL, RUTGERS UNIVERSITY

9.2

9.1

506

5,533

N.J.I.T.

14.8

18.7

450

Glassboro

12.4

10.8

105

976

Jersey City

24.2

22.1

106

479

Kean

12.8

14.4

134

931

Montclair

12.3

12.0

142

1,187

Ramapo

19.2

18.3

367

Stockton

12.1

10.4

800

Trenton

7.7

10.7

912

Wm. Paterson

10.1

10.2

104

1.015

TOTAL, STATE COLLEGES

12.6

839

6.667

GRAND TOTAL, ALL PUBLIC FOUR-YEAR

11.2

11.3

1,429

12.650

•Includes E.O.F. students in the College of Pharmacy, which does not have its ow> E.O.F. program.

** Includes E.O.F. students in the Mason Gross School of the Arts, university College (N.B.) and the College of Pharmacy, which do not have their
own E.O.F. programs.

38 • Annual Report o\ t Higher Education.' in New Jersey, 1986-87 M

Table 17

E.O.E PERCENT OF NEW JERSEY FULL-TIME FIRST-TIME FRESHMEN
IN NEW JERSEY COMMUNITY COLLEGES

# of Fall '86

E.O.F. % Of Total

N.J.

1985

1986

E.O.F.

FTFTF

Atlantic

13.0

21.6

399

Beraen

in n
1U.U

l,zU/

Brookdale

6.5

10.0

107

1,077

Burlington

Q 7

in c

ool

Camden

10.3

9.1

967

Cumberland

24.0

32.0

272

Essex

35.2

38.2

208

544

Gloucester

11.8

12.0

524

Hudson

11.2

10.7

828

Mercer

8.0

10.8

103

954

Middlesex

7.2

12.7

141

1,107

Morris

1.5

2.3

1,450

Ocean

7.4

10.2

870

Passaic

34.5

35.1

248

Salem

26.6

38.2

Somerset

5.0

6.0

605

Union

7.0

11.0

875

GRAND TOTAL,

COMMUNITY COLLEGES

10.4

12.1

1,521

12,554

Annual Reporton Higher Education in' New Jersey. 1986-87 • 39

ERIC

Table 18

E.O.E PERCENT OF NEW JERSEY FULL-TIME FIRST-TIME FRESHMEN
IN NEW JERSEY INDEPENDENT COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES

#0fFall*86

E.O.F.% Of Total
1985

E.O.F. % Of Total
1986

E.O.F.

N.J.
FTFTF

Bloomfield

19.9

17.3

179

Caldwell

22.6

16.7

108

Centenary

16.6

16.3

123

Drew University

8.5

9.3

182

Fairleigh Dickinson University

8.4

7.6

981

Georgian Court

16.2

14.8

122

Monmouth

5.7

8.4

369

Princeton University

2.3

1.2

169

Rider

5.1

5.3

569

Saint Elizabeth's

14.1

23.9

Saint Peter's

10.7

11.4

412

Seton Hall University

7.5

11.6

687

Stevens Institute

3.7

6.9

245

Upsala

19.0

22.3

166

Westminster Choir

27.3

42.9

TOTAL, INDEPENDENT COLLEGES

9.2

10.1

445

4,393

40 • Annual Report on Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87

Table 19

TOTAL AND TENURED FACULTY* IN NEW JERSEY COLLEGES
AND UNIVERSITIES, BY COLLEGIATE SECTOR

Fall 1977

Fall 1986

#Fac.

# Ten'd

% Ten'd

#Fac.

# Ten'd

% Ten'd

Rutgers University

2,011

1,043

51.9

1,948

1,297

66.6

N.J.l.T.

268

162

60.4

317

186

58.7

U.M.D.N.J.

537

287

53.4

922

362

39.3

State Colleges

2,652

1,977

74.5

2,348

1,885

80.3

Community Colleges

1,900

1,346

70.8

1,S r T

1,489

78.6

Independents

2,523

1,542

61.1

2,491

1,555

62.4

TOTAL

9,891

6,357

64.3

9,921

6,774

68.3

'Includes all fulMime instructional faculty.

Table 20

DISTRIBUTION BY RANK OF FACULTY* IN NEW JERSEY COLLEGES
AND UNIVERSITIES, BY COLLEGIATE SECTOR

Fall 1977 Fall 1986

Total # Total *

Prof.

Assoc.

Ass't.

Others

(100%)

Prof.

Assoc.

Ass't.

Others

(100%)

Rutgers University

27.6

25.8

32.7

13.9

2,011

33.6

33.7

22.9

9,8

1,948

N.J.l.T.

26.1

34.3

31.7

7,9

268

27.4

34.4

15.8

22.4

317

U.M.D.N.J.

30.0

26.8

34.3

8.9

537

22.3

33.8

39.2

4.7

922

State Colleges

20.9

26.4

39.6

13.1

2,652

31.6

31.3

34.6

2,5

2,348

Community Colleges

7.8

24.6

40.9

26.7

1,900

19.1

34.6

31.0

15.3

1,895

Independents

33.1

27.5

29.6

9.8

2,523

39.1

26.3

25.8

8.8

2,491

TOTAL

23.5

26.4

35.4

14.7

9,891

30.5

31.5

29.2

8.8

9,921

•Includes all fulMime instructional faculty.

Annual Report on Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87 • 41

Table 21a

NEWLY HIRED FULL-TIME FACULTY IN NEW JERSEY PUBLIC
COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, BY COLLEGIATE SECTOR

1982-83 New Hires 1983-84 New Hires

Total
(100%)

Women

Black

Hisp.

Total
(100%)

Women

8Iack

Hisp.

Rutgers University

117

33.3

3.4

2.6

137

31.4

5.1

6.6

NJ.I.T.

10.7

3.6

8.8

2.9

U.M.D.N.J.

40.4

9.6

5.8

36.7

3.3

State Colleges

142

34.5

10.6

3.5

119

39.5

11.8

3.4

Community Colleges

119

52.9

8.4

109

63.3

7.3

5.5

TOTAL

458

38.2

7.4

2.6

459

40.1

7.0

4.6

Table 21b

NEWLY HIRED FULL-TIME FACULTY IN NEW JERSEY PUBLIC
COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, BY COLLEGIATE SECTOR

1984-85 New Hires 1985-86 New Hires 1986-87 New Hires

Total

8lack

Hisp.

(100%)

Women

8lack

Hisp.

(100%)

Women

81a ck

Hisp.

(100%)

Women

Rutgers University

161

42.2

5.6

3.1

167

41.9

3.6

2.4

113

40.7

6.2

2.7

NJ.I.T.

17.6

5.9

4.5

13.6

4.5

16.0

U.M.D.N.J.

39.5

7.0

28.6

7.9'

11.1

41.9

10.5

1.2

State Colleges

152

44.1

14.4

5.3

119

49.6

8.4

4.2

139

45.3

11.5

6.5

Community Colleges

112

68.8

8.S

1.8

110

67.3

10.0

3.6

119

63.9

15.1

4.2

TOTAL

485

47.8

9.1

3.3

481

46.2

7.3

4.4

482

46.7

10.4

3.7

42 • Annual Rep .ton Higher Education! in; New Jersey. 1986-87

Table 22

FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES IN NEW JERSEY PUBLIC COLLEGES
AND UNIVERSITIES* BY EMPLOYMENT CATEGORY;**
SEX, AND RACE/ETHNICITY

1977-78 Employees 1985-86 Employees

Total #

% of Total

Total #

% of Total

(100%)

Women

Black

Hispanic

(100%)

Women

8lack

Hispanic

Exec. / Admin. / Managerial

1,274

20.9

12.5

2.2

1,322

32.6

14.1

2,4

Faculty

7,399

30.9

5.5

1.7

7,148

32.9

5.6

2.0

Nonfac. Prof L

1,595

50.0

14.7

3.3

2,202

56.5

15.9

4.6

Nonprofit

8,884

59.4

18.7

3.9

9,041

61.4

21 3

6.5

TOTAL

19,152

45.1

12.9

2.9

19,713

48.6

14.5

4.4

•Excludes U.M,D,N.J. in both years, because their 1985-86 data are not comparable to their data for previous years. Including U.M.D.N.J. in
1985-86 raises the overall proportions of women and blacks (to 50.8% and 19.6%, .espectively), and lowers slightly that of Hispanics (to 4.3%).
This pattern obtains for each employment category, with the exception of faculty, where inclusion of U.M.D.N.J. lowers the proportions of
women and blacks, and administrators, where it raises the proportion of Hispanics.

••The employment categories are defined according to the principal activities of employees:

Executive, Administrative, and Managerial - have major responsibility for the management of the institution or of a customarily recognized
department or division.

Faculty - conduct instruction, research, or public service as a principal activity; hold academic rank titles.

Professional Nonfaculty - engage in principal activities (other than those of faculty or administrators) which require specialized professional
training.

Nonprofessional - includes clerical or secretarial, technical or para 'profess ion al, skilled crafts, and service or maintenance.
NOTE: These data are collected biennially. Next reporting cycle is 1987-88.

ERIC

AnnualReporton Higher Education' in New Jersey, 1986-87 • 43

APPENDIX B

STATE COLLEGE AUTONOMY TRANSITION TEAM

Harold W. Eickhoff
President

Trenton State College

Vera King Farris
President

Stockton State College

Darryl Greer
Executive Director

New Jersey State College Governing Boards Association

Selvin F. Gumbs
Director

Office of Budget and Fiscal Planning

New Jersey Department of Higher Education

Russell W. Hawkins

Chairman, Board of Trustees

William P aterson College of New Jersey

Laurence Marcus
Director

Office for State Colleges

New Jersey Department of Higher Education

Robert A. Scott
President

Ramapo College of New Jersey

Peter Spiridon

Vice President for Administration and Rnance

William Paterson College of New Jersey

James C. Wallace
(Chairman)

Assistant Chancellor for Fiscal Affairs

New Jersey Department of Higher Education

46 • Annual Retort on Higher Education' in New Jersey, 1986-87

OVERSIGHT PANELS

State College Challe nge Grants*
Kenneth B. Clark

Member (Retired), New York State Board of Regents

Distinguished Professor of Psychology

City College of the City University of New York

Barbara W. Newell

Former Chancellor, The State University System of Florida
Visiting Scholar, Harvard University

Robert C. Wood

Former U.S. Secretary of Housing and Development
Henry Luce Professor of Government, Wesleyan University

Community College Challenge G rants

George Keller
Senior Vice President
The Barton-Gillet Company
Baltimore, Maryland

R. Jan LeCroy
Chancellor

Dallas County Community College District (Texas)

Queen F. Randall
President

American River College (California)

John E. Roueche
Director

Community College Leadership Program
University of Texas at Austin

Annual Reporton Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87 • 47

8 a

ERLC

• 50

TRANSFER ADVISORY BOARD

Fred J. Abbate

General Manager of Corporate Communications
Atlantic Electric Company

Thomas Grites

Director of Academic Advising

Stockton State College

Carlos Hernandez

Vice President of Academic Affairs

Jersey City State College

J. Harrison Morson

Dean for Student Services

Mercer County Community College

Mary Robertson-Smith

Vice President and Dean of Instructional Services
Bergen Community College

Richard White

Director of Educational Development
Merck and Company

48 • Annual Retort on Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87

REVIEW PANEL: INSTITUTIONAL STRATEGIC PLANS
ON MINORITY ENROLLMENTS

John P. Bean
Assistant Professor

Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies
Indiana University (Bloomington)

Manuel Gomez

Director of Educational Opportunity Program and Student Affirmative Action Office
University of California (Irvine)

Charles E. Morris

Vice President for Administrative Services
Illinois State U niversity

Gwendolyn W. Sanders

Dean of Student Services

Delaware Technical and Com munity College

Leonard Valverde

Department Chair and Professor of Educational Administration
University of Texas (Austin)

Reginald Wilson

Director of the Office of Minority Concerns
American Council on Education

Annual Report on Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87 • 49

NEW JERSEY STUDENT ASSISTANCE POLICY BOARDS

Educational Opportunity Fund

Judith Cambria, Chair
Joseph Harris
Cadmus Hull
Robert Klein
Cheryl Prejean
Oliver Quinn

Maria Vizcarrondo-DeSoto
T. Edward Hollander, ex officio

Student Assistance Board

Joseph W. Streit, Chair
M. Wilma Harris
Vera King Farris
Rev. Edward Glynn
S. Charles Irace
Luis Nieves
Oliver Quinn
Arthur Richmond
Morton Shenker
Gary Thomas

T. Edward Hollander, ex officio

Higher Education Assistance Authority

Jerome Lieberman, Chair
Francis T. Tomczuk, Vice Chair
Philip W. Koebig III
Anthony E. Vaz

T. Edward Hollander, ex officio

ERLC

50 • Annual Report on Higher Education' in New Jersey, 1986-87

COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDY COMMISSION:
A PANEL TO STUDY THE MAJOR EDUCATIONAL ISSUES
PERTINENT TO THE FUTURE HEALTH AND VITALITY
OF THE COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGES

Joseph Shenker, Co-Chair
President

Fiorello H. LaGuardia Community College (New York)

Joshua L Smith, Co-Chair
Chancellor

California Community Colleges

Alfredo G. de los Santos

Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Maricopa County Community College District (Arizona)

Harold L Hodgkinson
Senior Fellow

American Council on Education

Richard C. Richardson
Professor of Higher Education

Associate Director of the National Center for Postsecondary Governance and Finance
Arizona State University

Brunetta R. Wolfman
President

Roxbury Community College (Massachusetts)

Annual Report on Higher Education' in New Jersey, 1986-87 • 51

1. Assumption College for Sisters

2. Atlantic Community College

3. Bergen Community College
4: The Berkeley School

5. Beth Medrash Govoha

6. Btoomfietd College

7. Brookdate Community College

8. Burlington County College

9. Caldwell College

10. Camden County College

1 1 . Centenary College

12. College of Saint Elizabeth

13. Cumberland County College

14. Don Bosco College

15. Drew University

16. Essex County College

17. Fairleigh Dickinson University, Edward Williams College

18. Fairleigh Dickinson University, Horham-Madson Campus

19. Fairleigh Dickinson University, Rutherford-Wayne Campus

20. Fairleigh Dickinson University, Teaneck-Hackensack Campus

21. Feiician College

22. Georgian Court College

23. Gtassboro State College

24. Gloucester County College

25. Hudson County Community College

26. Jersey City State College

27. Katharine Gibbs School

28. Kean College of New Jersey

29. Mercer County Community College

30. Middlesex County College

31. Monmouth College

32. Montclair State College

33. County College of Morris

34. New Brunswick Theological Seminary

35. New Jersey institute of Technology

36. Northeastern Bible College

37. Ocean County College

38. Passaic County Community College

39. Princeton Theological Seminary

40. Princeton University

41. Rabbinical College of America

42. Ramapo College of New Jersey

43. Rider College

44. Rutgers University at Camden

45. Rutgers University at Newark

46. Rutgers University at New Brunswick

47. Saint Peter's College M a

48. Salem Community College "

49. Seton Hall University

50. Somerset (Raritan Valley Community College)

51. Stevens Institute of Technology

52. Stockton State College

53. Sussex County Community College Commission

54. Talmudical Academy

55. Thomas A. Edison State College

56. Trenton State College

57. University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey
Piscataway Campus

58. University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey
Newark Campus

59. University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey
Camden Campus

60. Union County College

61. Upsala College, East Orange

62. Upsala College, Sussex

63. Warren County Community College Commission

64. Westminster Choir College

65. William Paterson College of New Jersey

A Two-year, public
■ Four-year, public
+ Two-year, independent
% Four-year, independent

52 • Annual Report on Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Texts

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "ERIC ED304982: Annual Report on Higher Education in New Jersey, 1986-87."

See other formats